Afternoon summary
Planning for a no-deal Brexit from 2018 “crowded out” government efforts to prepare for a pandemic and contributed to leaving the country unready, the first evidence session of the Covid public inquiry has heard.
The Commons privileges committee has revealed that it received a letter from Boris Johnson at 11.57pm last night. It had been expected to publish its report into claims he misled MPs about Partygate tomorrow, but now it is not expected until Thursday. A report in the Times says it will find that Johnson had deliberately misled MPs. (See 4.25pm.) This is from my colleague Aubrey Allegretti.
Privileges committee says:
— Aubrey Allegretti (@breeallegretti) June 13, 2023
"A letter enclosing further representations from Mr Johnson was received by the Committee at 11:57pm last night. The Committee is dealing with these and will report promptly."
So looks like report not coming tomorrow
UK government borrowing costs have risen above the levels hit during Liz Truss’s disastrous premiership, after stronger than expected jobs and pay figures reinforced expectations that the Bank of England would raise interest rates next week.
Labour has ruled out offering universal free childcare for children over nine months old but is considering a means-tested offer, sources have told the Guardian, as the party strives to prove its fiscal credibility.
Rami Ranger, a prominent Conservative peer and donor, bullied and harassed a female journalist after she publicly criticised him and an organisation he runs, the Lords standards commissioner has ruled.
Updated
Outgoing prime ministers should not be allowed to nominate people for peerages in resignation honours lists, the former Tory leader William Hague suggests. He has made the proposal in his Times column today. He says:
Good repairs can be quite small. Take prime ministers’ resignation honours, a tradition since 1895 already damaged by Harold Wilson taking it too far in 1976. Wouldn’t it be better to agree that such honours should only be for the unsung heroes behind the scenes, the staff who toil loyally night and day, for whom an OBE would be lifelong recognition, rather than a list of peerages that undermines the whole tradition?
That would be one tiny brick put back in the wall, building back respect for the system of government and its standards. We will need leaders who will find such bricks, and who will repair, not scorn, our institutions.
And Robin Allen KC, representing the Local Government Association and Welsh Local Government Association, told the Covid inquiry that one problem was that central government did not trust local government. He said:
Too often during the pandemic central government did not fully understand the way local government in England worked and what it could contribute.
It seemed as though there was a lack of trust in local authorities, even perhaps a misplaced confidence by central government as to what it could achieve itself.
The Covid inquiry hearing has finished for the day. Earlier, Steven Ford KC, who is representing the Association of Directors of Public Health (ADPH), used his opening statement to complain about the way central government had sidelined local health officials. He said:
[Health officials] should have been consulted earlier and more comprehensively by national bodies.
Firstly, at the start of the pandemic, the Department for Health and Social Care (DHSC) did not hold an up-to-date contact list for directors of the public health in various local authorities.
Secondly, at the start of the pandemic directors were learning about new policies and guidance at the same time as members of the public were when the televised 5pm daily briefings began to be broadcast.
They were expected to impose these policies without the necessary structures and support mechanisms having been in place.
Updated
Labour rules out universal childcare for young children in fiscal credibility drive
Labour has ruled out offering universal free childcare for children over nine months old but is considering a means-tested offer, sources have told the Guardian. Kiran Stacey and Rowena Mason have the story here.
Boris Johnson “was informed that Nadine Dorries’s peerage had been rejected as far back as February”, the Times reports, in a story attributing the information to senior government sources.
Dorries, the former culture secretary, has claimed that she and Johnson did not find out that Dorries was left off his resignation honours list until it was published last Friday. In their story Oliver Wright and Henry Zeffman report:
Dorries said that she had been told by Johnson last week that she would be included on the list and accused Rishi Sunak of “duplicitously and cruelly” in blocking her from getting a peerage.
But her account has been disputed by the government, which said Johnson had been given prior warning that Dorries could not take up a peerage unless she made clear she would immediately stand down as an MP.
Dorries says that even on Thursday night last week Johnson was assuring her that she was still on the list.
In her interview with TalkTV last night, asked if she thought it was possible that Johnson might have been lying to her, she replied: “100%, I don’t think that’s true.”
The Commons privileges committee report into Boris Johnson had been expected tomorrow. But, according to Newsnight’s Nicholas Watt, publication has been delayed.
I understand the commons privileges committee report on Boris Johnson will not be published tomorrow. Looking like later this week. I understand that it is a huge logistical operation with appendixes and publication of evidence
— Nicholas Watt (@nicholaswatt) June 13, 2023
According to a story by Steven Swinford in the Times today, the report will conclude that Johnson deliberately misled MPs about Partygate. Swinford says:
Boris Johnson deliberately misled parliament over the Downing Street parties scandal, a committee of MPs will find …
Martin Reynolds, Johnson’s principal private secretary at the time, advised him in December 2021 that he should remove a claim from a statement to the Commons that “all guidance had been followed at all times”. He questioned “whether it was realistic to argue that all guidance had been followed at all times”. Johnson removed the line from his opening statement but repeated the assertion during a debate in the Commons less than half an hour later. The Times has been told that the committee views this as evidence that Johnson deliberately misled the Commons …
The former prime minister’s comments at his March hearing with the committee have also been deemed misleading. Johnson said his attendance at several No 10 leaving drinks, where staff consumed alcohol without social distancing, was a “necessary” part of his working life as prime minister.
He said he did not believe for “one second” that rules had been breached because the guidance only required workplaces to distance as far as possible. This claim has been rejected by the committee, which has highlighted guidance stating that where social distancing could not be followed businesses “should consider whether that activity needs to continue for the business to operate”.
THE TIMES: Ex - PM was not told he had obeyed Covid rules #TomorrowsPapersToday pic.twitter.com/S93e5qm98v
— Neil Henderson (@hendopolis) June 12, 2023
No-deal Brexit planning was 'advantageous' overall for pandemic preparedness in Northern Ireland, Covid inquiry told
Back at the Covid inquiry Neasa Murnaghan KC, counsel for the Department of Health in Northern Ireland, addressed the point about Brexit, and whether it hindered pandemic preparedness (see 12.08pm), in her opening statement this afternoon.
She conceded that planning for a no-deal Brexit did result in less time being devoted to pandemic planning than might otherwise have been the case.
But she said that, overall, the impact was positive. That was because no-deal planning involved things like stockpiling medicines and medical equipment, and creating multi-agency teams, that proved useful during the pandemic.
UPDATE: Murnaghan said:
I should also … make a brief remark about the preparations Northern Ireland had undertaken for a no-deal EU exit.
Whilst these preparations did divert some of our focus away from pandemic preparedness planning, as was no doubt the case for all four nations of the United Kingdom, on the positive side the many aspects of additional training, improvements in the resilience of supply chains and the preparedness to manage the potential consequences were, when considered overall, thought to be advantageous.
The benefits included local and regional increased buffer stocks and stockpiles for medicines and medical devices, clinical consumables and the enhanced multi-agency command and control training undertaken by all Northern Ireland departments and multi-agency responders.
Updated
SNP at risk of 'extinction event' because of perception it could not 'run a tap', says former leader Alex Salmond
The SNP is at risk of an “extinction event” if it does not change course, Alex Salmond, the former Scottish first minister, and former SNP leader, has said.
In an interview with the Holyrood Sources podcast, Salmond also said that Nicola Sturgeon would have suspended herself from the party if she had still been leader, following her arrest on Sunday.
Sturgeon served as Salmond’s deputy until he resigned as first minister in 2014 and she succeeded him. For many years they were very close, but they fell out bitterly over the Scottish government’s handling of the sexual assault allegations against Salmond (he was eventually cleared) and Salmond now leads Alba, a rival nationalist party.
Speaking about the SNP’s current plight, Salmond said:
The SNP as a political party is facing a potential – I was going to say, extinction event – maybe that’s a bit alarming, but if you don’t change course, then that’s where it’s heading.
Momentum works two ways. It can work in your favour, very substantially. Reverse momentum is equally compelling. And they have to shift the narrative. The narrative now is that the SNP find it difficult to run a tap in the Scottish parliament, is embarked on confrontational issues with the Scottish population, which are causing significant damage to these groups in society, but more so to the SNP’s reputation. There is a real underlying feeling that key public services are not being run as they should be run.
Salmond said Humza Yousaf, the current first minister, would need to show “assertive leadership” to rescue the party.
But he implicitly criticised Yousaf’s decision not to suspend Sturgeon after she was arrested by police on Sunday as part of the inquiry into SNP finances, saying that if Sturgeon was still leader, she would have suspended a colleague in these circumstances. He said:
Nicola Sturgeon would have suspended Nicola Sturgeon under these circumstances. No question about that.
EXCLUSIVE: In his first comments since Nicola Sturgeon was arrested, @AlexSalmond tells the Holyrood Sources podcast:
— Holyrood Sources (@HolyroodSources) June 13, 2023
"Nicola Sturgeon would have suspended Nicola Sturgeon - no question about that."
Full episode coming soon...@CalumAM | @geoffaberdein | @akmaciver pic.twitter.com/RGIW6PeQ3D
Updated
Greg Hands says Tories will use Uxbridge byelection to campaign against Ulez expansion
Greg Hands, the Conservative party chair, has been campaigning in Uxbridge and South Ruislip today, ahead of the byelection taking place as a result of Boris Johnson’s resignation. He says a key issue for his party will be their opposition to expansion of the Ulez low emissions zone to outer London by Sadiq Khan, the Labour mayor.
In Uxbridge and South Ruislip today, getting out a strong @Conservatives message.
— Greg Hands (@GregHands) June 13, 2023
✅ record police numbers
✅ stop Khan’s ULEZ expansion
✅ new Hillingdon hospital coming#VoteConservative pic.twitter.com/61CQrGTCdJ
In an analysis, ITV’s Harry Horton says this could make winning the seat, where Johnson had a majority of 7,210, more challenging for Labour than some people assume.
People who drive in the zone in a non-compliant vehicle will need to pay a daily charge of £12.50. Supporters of the scheme say it will help clean up the air in some of the most polluted parts of London.
Several Conservative-led councils have launched legal action against the expanded scheme and protests have popped up in areas soon to be included. In short, it’s left some voters feeling very angry …
If the Conservatives pick an anti-Ulez candidate (which they are almost certain to), it’s not inconceivable that this by-election could start to be seen as a referendum on Ulez, which is much trickier territory for Labour.
Picture this scenario: the mid-Bedfordshire and Selby and Ainsty byelections are more comfortable ground for the Conservatives. Both seats enjoy health 20,000+ majorities. If Rishi Sunak can keep those constituencies blue – and cling on in Boris Johnson’s former seat – then he will head into autumn with renewed confidence he can turn things around for his party ahead of a general election.
Updated
Back at the Covid inquiry, the chair, Heather Hallett, has now heard opening statements from counsel representing bereaved families in Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland and from the BMA. Sam Jacobs, who represents the TUC, is making his opening statement now.
He says the TUC wants the current module, looking at preparedness, to look at “the legacy of austerity”.
It is “a simple but inescapable truth that public services stretched to breaking point by over a decade of budget cuts will be severely impaired in their ability to cope with the shock of a national emergency, such as a pandemic”, he says.
Updated
Boris Johnson was given updates about his resignation honours list before he met with Rishi Sunak in June, PA Media reports. PA says:
The former prime minister is involved in a public spat with Sunak over his House of Lords nominations, after Nadine Dorries and other allies missed out on getting peerages.
Dorries has claimed information about what was needed for her to pass the vetting process for nominees was not relayed to her in time and accused the prime minister of “duplicitously and cruelly” blocking her appointment.
She used an interview with TalkTV to launch a fresh attack on Sunak, claiming he used “weasel words” and “sophistry” in a meeting with Johnson last week which left the outgoing MP believing she would be included. [See 2.16pm.]
It is understood Johnson was provided with information via the Cabinet Office about his list some time after the House of Lords appointments commission sent a list to Sunak in February of the seven approved names which were announced on Friday.
The former leader’s team has been contacted for comment.
Ministers to get new powers to ban suppliers who pose national security risk under changes to procurement bill
In the Commons MPs are debating the final stages of the procurement bill. The government has been under pressure from Tory MPs to strengthen the legislation, to make it easier for suppliers to be blocked if they are deemed to pose a security threat (China is the main concern), and the Cabinet Office has announced that it is toughening the bill to address these worries.
In a news release summing up the changes, the Cabinet Office says:
Two new measures [have been tabled] through amendments to the bill:
Establishing a National Security Unit for Procurement. The new team, based in the Cabinet Office, will investigate suppliers who may pose a risk to national security and assess whether companies should be barred from public procurements.
New powers to ban suppliers from specific sectors where they pose a risk to national security, such as areas related to defence and national security, while allowing them to continue to win procurements in non-sensitive areas.
In addition, the government has committed to publishing a timeline for the removal of surveillance equipment produced by companies subject to China’s national intelligence law from sensitive central government sites.
Updated
No 10 rejects Nadine Dorries' suggestion Sunak blocked her peerage because she wasn't 'posh'
In an interview last night on TalkTV Nadine Dorries, the former culture secretary and prominent Boris Johnson supporter, suggested that class was a factor in her failure to get a peerage in Johnson’s resignation honours list. Stressing her own working-class background in Liverpool, she said that she had been victimised by “two privileged posh boys” who had removed her name from the list.
"This story is about a girl from Liverpool who had something that was offered to her removed by two privileged posh boys."
— Piers Morgan Uncensored (@PiersUncensored) June 12, 2023
Nadine Dorries blames Rishi Sunak and James Forsyth for not getting the peerage she says Boris Johnson promised her.@NadineDorries | @piersmorgan pic.twitter.com/lNSRl3OF2z
Dorries also set out the same argument in her column in the Daily Mail today.
The two “posh boys” she was referring to are Rishi Sunak and his political secretary, James Forsyth. Both attended the elite Winchester college, where they became close friends.
At the Downing Street lobby briefing this morning the PM’s spokesperson rejected the suggestion that Sunak was opposed to working-class people getting peerages. Asked if the PM thought peerages should only go to “posh” people, the spokesperson replied: “No.”
Dorries says that the House of Lords appointments commission (Holac) did not approve her for a peerage because she had not given an assurance that, if she were on the list, she would stand down as an MP (instead of trying to defer going to the Lords, to avoid a byelection). In her Mail article, she says Holac would not discuss this with her, but that she was told “instructions would be sent to No 10, to be passed on”. This did not happen, she said.
At the Downing Street lobby briefing the PM’s spokesperson said that Sunak did not try to change the list agreed by Holac and that it would not have been appropriate for No 10 to discuss this matter with Dorries. The spokesperson said:
In line with the longstanding custom, the prime minister forwards the list unaltered following vetting by Holac.
Obviously it is not for No 10 or the Cabinet Office to be in contact with individuals going through the Holac process – again, that would not be appropriate.
In her London Playbook briefing for Politico this morning, which explores the claims and counter-claims in the Holac story in admirable detail, Rosa Prince quotes a No 10 insider as saying Johnson himself was the person who should have been updating Dorries on the progress of the appointment, and advising her about the need to commit to standing down as an MP. The insider said:
It is neither allowed nor incumbent on the government to speak to anyone on the list. The only person who is updated [by Holac] as a courtesy is the former prime minister … the person who could have told the MPs about the progress but clearly didn’t, or wasn’t being totally upfront, was Boris.
Updated
Covid inquiry criticised by campaign group for not taking more evidence in person from bereaved families
The Covid inquiry hearing this morning opened with a moving video showing relatives who lost loved ones during the pandemic talking about their experience.
But the Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice (CBFFJ) group has complained that not enough attention is being paid at this stage of the inquiry to bereaved relatives. In a statement Jo Goodman and Matt Fowler, CBFFJ co-founders, said:
The inquiry’s inadequate “Every Story Matters” project and decision to only call up one of our 6,500 members to speak in the first module have been incredibly disappointing and hurtful. But far worse, they risk crucial learnings being missed, which could cost lives in the future. The inquiry has no hope of understanding the key decisions made in government if it doesn’t understand their impact.
Today we have a simple message for Baroness Hallett: We will never forget the loved ones we lost in the pandemic, and we will do whatever it takes to ensure that their deaths are learnt from so others don’t have to face the same awful, and preventable, fate.
CBFFJ and 38 Degrees arranged for an ad van to display messages from bereaved families outside the inquiry hearing this morning.
Hallett addressed this point in her opening remarks this morning, saying she had a “very difficult balance” to strike in deciding who to call to give evidence. (See 10.11am.)
Updated
Tory peer ‘undermined and humiliated’ journalist, finds Lords commissioner
Rami Ranger, a prominent Conservative peer and donor, bullied and harassed a female journalist after she publicly criticised him and an organisation he runs, a Lords committee has ruled. Kiran Stacey has the story here.
Commons education committee launches inquiry into Ofsted
MPs on the Commons education committee have launched a new inquiry into England’s beleaguered schools inspectorate, Ofsted, looking at the impact of inspections on teachers and school leaders and whether the current ratings system is actually helping schools improve.
It follows the death of headteacher Ruth Perry, whose family say she killed herself earlier this year after her primary school was downgraded from “outstanding” to “inadequate”, prompting a national outcry. Yesterday Ofsted announced a number of reforms to try to ease the burden on headteachers, which Perry’s family and the education sector promptly concluded were nowhere near enough.
The cross-party committee will examine the current inspection framework, which was first introduced in 2019, and its impact on school standards. MPs will also consider the controversial single-word ratings system used to assess a school, as well as the current complaints procedure available to schools, to see how they might be improved.
Robin Walker, the Conservative chair of the committee, said:
Despite a growing political consensus that it does have an important part to play, this year has seen a notable groundswell of criticism towards Ofsted, which appears to have stemmed from a feeling that inspections place a high burden on school staff, and a view that one-word ratings do not always fully capture the quality of teaching and care that a school provides to children from a range of backgrounds.
Ofsted plays a particularly vital role when it comes to safeguarding but ensuring that inspections are proportionate, timely and reasonable is essential to build trust, especially after the tragic passing of headteacher Ruth Perry.
Some have argued that Ofsted’s role should be expanded to provide more support to schools that need to improve, amid concerns around the impact that receiving a negative rating can have on a school’s morale and reputation. It is vital that Ofsted is clear in its role as an independent inspectorate and that it can respond to serious concerns properly when they are raised, which is why we will also want to look carefully at its complaints process.
Updated
Pat McFadden, the shadow chief secretary to the Treasury, asked the urgent question on UK mortgage costs. Replying to Andrew Griffith, he said the average price of a mortgage was going up by £2,300 this year. He went on:
All of this pressure was multiplied by the irresponsible decision of the Conservative government to last year use the country for a giant economic experiment which put booster rockets under mortgage rates while they enacted their teenage right-wing pamphlet fantasies, using the country like lab rats.
Homeowners and renters were left to pay the price.
The Tories were fighting “like rats in a sack”, he said. He said they were not in a position to address the problem, and should make way for Labour.
In his reply, Griffith repeated his argument about this being an international problem. In the US mortgage rates were also going up, he said.
Updated
Treasury minister tells MPs that rising interest rates are global issue, not just problem for UK
Turning away from the Covid inquiry, in the Commons Pat McFadden, the shadow chief secretary to the Treasury, has just asked an urgent question about “developments in the mortgage market in recent days”.
As Graeme Wearden writes on his business live blog, the government’s short-term borrowing costs now higher than they were during Liz Truss’s brief premiership, when her mini-budget spooked the markets.
Graeme says:
These two-year gilts are used to price fixed-term mortgages, and the recent increase in yields has already been forcing lenders to re-price deals, or pull them off the markets.
There could be more pain ahead too, as the money markets expect Bank of England base rate to hit 5.5% by the end of this year, up from 4.5% today.
Andrew Griffith, a Treasury minister, is replying. He said the UK was “not an outlier in this” and that central banks around the world were putting up interest rates.
We are not an outlier in this, as opposition members will know.
Central banks around the world are raising interest rates to combat high inflation driven by the pandemic and Putin’s war.
But he knew mortgage rates were a concern, he said
He said, if customers fell into difficulties, lending rules required lenders to treat them fairly. Repossession was a matter of last resort, he said.
He claimed the government was taking action to halve inflation. But Labour’s £28bn borrowing plan would put interest rates up, he claimed.
Updated
Weatherby says some politicians will argue that austerity put the UK in a good position to deal with the pandemic.
But experts will point to its impact on public health, and local authority resilience, he says.
Weatherby says the 2011 pandemic flu preparedness plan was the closest thing the government had to a pandemic plan. But it was not adequate, he suggests.
Was that fit for purpose for a non-flu pandemic in 2020? Why wasn’t there a whole-system plan?
Many civil emergencies are local and require a local response backed up by central government support, where necessary.
Wasn’t it obvious that civil emergencies, including pandemics, are by very nature national whole-system emergencies and require national whole-system planning as a result?
Options for border controls and screening, travel restrictions and quarantine, maintaining food supplies and public security, enforcing emergency restrictions on movement and assembly, maintaining education and social services systems and protecting the economic well-being of the country and jobs are all matters way beyond the remit of the Department of Health and Social Care.
Pete Weatherby KC, counsel for the Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice group, is making his opening statement now.
He says that when David Cameron was PM in 2015, he gave a speech to the G7 saying the world had to be better prepared for the threat posed by a pandemic.
He says families of those who died want to know whether this advice was actually followed, and whether everything possible was done to prepare the UK for the pandemic.
He asks if planning focused on the human impact of a potential pandemic.
And he says the inquiry needs to focus on structural discrimination and health inequalities. He says a disproportionate number of CBFFJ families are from black and brown communities.
Updated
Government planning for Brexit, and no deal, in 2019, may have weakened pandemic preparedness, inquiry counsel suggests
Keith says the year before the pandemic a huge amount of government planning was taking place relating to Brexit, and the risk of a no-deal Brexit. He goes on:
The pandemic struck the United Kingdom just as it was leaving the European Union. That departure required an enormous amount of planning and preparation, particularly to address what were likely to be the severe consequences of a no-deal exit on food and medicine supplies, travel and transport, business borders and so on.
It is clear that such planning, from 2018 onwards, crowded out and prevented some or perhaps a majority of the improvements that central government itself understood were required to be made to resilience planning and preparedness.
Did the attention therefore paid to the risks of a no-deal exit – Operation Yellowhammer as it was known – drain the resources and capacity that should have been continuing the fight against the next pandemic, that should have been utilised in preparing the United Kingdom for civil emergency?
Or did all that generic and operational planning in fact lead to people being better trained and well marshalled and, in fact, better prepared to deal with Covid and also to the existence of improved trade, medicine and supply links?
Addressing Heather Hallett, the inquiry chair, Keith said:
My lady, on the evidence so far, but it will be a matter for you, we very much fear that it was the former.
He ends his opening statement by saying the inquiry should also consider whether planning for pandemic considered health inequalities, and how some groups would be more vulnerable.
Updated
Inquiry will consider whether collapse in power sharing affected pandemic planning in Northern Ireland, Keith says
Keith says, in Northern Ireland, power sharing was suspended between January 2017 and January 2020. Northern Ireland was managed by civil servants, he says.
He says the inquiry will consider “to what extent that lack of ministerial input affected the civil emergency arrangements, and in particular the inability, because of the collapse of the power sharing agreement, to make any significant improvements to this structure during that interregnum”.
Updated
Keith is again referring to the emergency planning flowchart cited earlier. (See 11.13am.)
It shows that local resilience forums were often in the lead. But was that the right approach, he asks.
He also points out that there are bodies in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland duplicating what UK bodies are doing.
Government gave 'very little thought' in advance to prospect of lockdown being needed in pandemic, says inquiry counsel
After a short break, Hugo Keith KC, counsel for the inquiry, is continuing his opening statement.
He says “very little thought” was given ahead of Covid as to whether a lockdown might be needed if a pandemic struck the UK, and how it might be implemented.
Extraordinary though it may seem, given that it’s a word that’s forever seared in the nation’s consciousness, there was very little debate pre-pandemic of whether a lockdown might prove to be necessary in the event of a runaway virus, let alone how a lockdown could be avoided.
Very little thought was given to how, if it proved to be necessary, how something as complex, difficult and damaging as a national lockdown could be put in place at all.
Equally, there appears to have been a failure to think through the potentially massive impact on education and on the economy in trying to control a runaway virus in this way.
He again suggests ‘“complacency” was a factor.
Was there an element of complacency based on our recent experiences, including the ranking in the Global Health Security Index? Or our response to swine flu in 2009 and the UK’s undoubted successes in ensuring Sars and Mers did not spread?
Did our experience of the 2009 swine flu lead to concerns about overreacting?
He asks whether an agency should have had full control over emergency planning. He goes on:
Perhaps there should be a central leadership position accountable to parliament, with responsibility for whole system preparedness, resilience and response.
Updated
Government pandemic planning put too much focus on threat from flu, inquiry counsel suggests
Keith says the government prepared for a flu pandemic.
You will hear evidence that, for many years, an influenza pandemic was assessed as being one of the most likely risks to the United Kingdom. But what about other risks that, whilst they might be less likely, could be just as, if not more, deadly?
Did planning sufficiently address the risk not only of the known but the unknown? A new pathogen, a new disease, a disease X as it’s known, with pandemic potential?
Did planners pay sufficient focus on potential impact as opposed to likelihood?
With Covid, the evidence will demonstrate that the government thought that the greater risk was an influenza pandemic and therefore devoted more time and resources to that possibility.
In the event, we were hit of course by a coronavirus – that might suggest a lack of flexibility or proper foresight.
Or perhaps the policies, plans and structures were so flexible and broad … that this prevented us from focusing enough upon those particular risks which, whilst being perhaps less likely, could cause us more harm?
The inquiry will have to consider whether planning became “self-validating or complacent”, he says.
He says an influenza pandemic might have caused hundreds of thousands of deaths. But, because that was a risk, did it mean people did not consider other threats?
And he says the government had antiviral medicines stocked up for a flu pandemic. But did this mean that, while the government was thinking of dealing with the consequences of a pandemic, it was not thinking about how it could avoid a different sort of pandemic in the first place?
To what extent did United Kingdom government and devolved administrations have a strategy for preventing a pandemic from having disastrous effects, as opposed to dealing with the disastrous effects of the pandemic and the reasonable worst case scenario?
He repeats the point about testing not being such a requirement with flu (see 10.48am), implying that the UK should have had more testing capacity for a virus like Covid.
Updated
At the Covid inquiry Hugo Keith KC, counsel to the inquiry, is now talking specifically about the government’s preparedness. He says:
It is obvious that the degree to which Covid-19 could be prevented from laying waste to society was a matter within the control of government. And the systems for the EPR [emergency preparedness and response] existed … Systems may not be able to stop a pandemic in its tracks, but they ought to be able to put in place measures of understanding of virus, understanding and forecasting how it might develop, tracking it, limiting transmission and coping with the consequences of large-scale transmission.
Keith then shows a diagram showing how the system was supposed to work. This is from the Times’ Tom Whipple.
It’s all v complex. Luckily Mr Keith, the KC for the inquiry, has provided visual aids to help us understand UK gov bureaucracy. pic.twitter.com/ZnMH2FYbl0
— Tom Whipple (@whippletom) June 13, 2023
Updated
Keith is now talking about the impact of lockdown.
Almost every area of public life across all four nations, including education, work, travel, the majority of public services and family life, were adversely affected.
The hospitality, retail, travel and tourism, arts and culture, and the sport and leisure sectors effectively ceased. Even places of worship closed.
For very many, what they had to deal with when far beyond the curtailment of their normal lives and involve bereavement, serious illness, deprivation, mental illness, exposure to violence at home, terrible financial loss, loneliness, and many other forms of suffering.
Updated
Keith says the UK had not prepared for a non-flu pandemic.
That was relevant to testing capacity, he says. With flu, testing is less necessary, he suggests, because with flu you are more likely to show symptoms.
You know you have a bug, you go home possibly to bed and you try not to pass it on and tests aren’t needed.
Updated
UK 'might not have been very well prepared at all' for Covid pandemic in advance, inquiry's counsel says
Keith is now setting out a chronology of events at the outbreak of the pandemic.
He says that this module will focus on preparedness. And he goes on:
Even at this stage, before hearing the evidence, it is apparent that we might not have been very well prepared at all.
UPDATE: Keith said:
No amount of foresight or planning can guarantee that a country will not make mistakes when a disease strikes, but that does not mean that we should not strive to be as ready as we sensibly can be.
No country can be perfectly prepared, but it can certainly be underprepared.
Updated
Covid inquiry to focus on issues that have caused 'greatest public concern' in UK, its counsel, Hugo Keith KC, says
Hugo Keith KC, counsel for the inquiry, is now making his opening statement.
He says we may never know where the Sars-CoV-2 virus, that led to the pandemic, originated. And we may never know who the first person was to be affected.
No inquiry could look into all aspects of the pandemic, he says.
But this inquiry will focus on those areas of the pandemic that caused “the greatest public concern” in the UK, and where there is a need to make urgent reccommentations.
Updated
Heather Hallett, the inquiry chair, asks attendants to tell people who left the room because they were going to find the video too upsetting that they can now return.
She says the film was distressing for everyone, but would have been particularly distressing for relatives.
Updated
The video ends with a woman saying that, in order to move on, relatives have to know lessons will be learned from the inquiry.
A woman says it “really hurts” not being able to give someone a proper funeral, and make their “final journey lovely”. She is almost in tears.
Another woman says she still suffers from anxiety, and still wears her mask wherever she goes.
And another woman says, in Caribbean culture, hundreds of people attend a funeral. In her case, only 20 people were allowed. And the body was sealed in a bag. The family were not even allowed to break the lock on it.
A woman from Northern Ireland says in Northern Ireland wakes are important part of the grieving process. She says she cannot go to the cemetery now, because it reminds her of the workers in white suits and masks at the funeral, telling them their time was up. Her mother did not get a celebration of her life, she says. She says she feels that she failed her as a result.
Updated
A man recalls calling 999 when he was really ill. He woke up again in hospital. When he did wake up, he learned his wife had died. They had been married for 48 years.
A woman recalls her father’s funeral. There were just 15 people there. She did not hug anyone, from when she learned her father was dying until after the funeral. It was a very lonely time. Grief was compounded by loneliness, she says.
Updated
A woman recalls taking her mother to hospital. They “waited and waited and waited”. Then a doctor called, who just announced that her mother had passed away. She was expecting to go and see her again, but she was told she had died.
The video features multiple clips from participants. The woman who was featured earlier, talking about her father and sisted dying within five days of each other, is talking about the moment her sister died.
A woman, Jane, recalls her father being taken to hospital. She accompanied him, and urged her dad “to be the strongest you’ve every been”.
Another woman recalls being so ill she was “spitting blood”. She went to hospital, and was taken to ICU where she was intubated. She woke up six weeks later. On three occasions she was so unwell they stopped treatment. But slowly and steadily she recovered.
Updated
The video is being shown now. It features interviews with members of the public recalling their experience of the pandemic. One woman recalls, at the start of the pandemic, discussing with her boss how they would know people who would die as the pandemic developed. But she never realised it would be “my dad and my sister five days apart”, she says, holding back tears.
Updated
Hallett says the concerns of the bereaved will “always be at the heart of the inquiry”. She says:
I have promised many times that those who suffered hardship and loss are and will always be at the heart of the inquiry. And I have done my very best within the constraints upon me of time, resources and my terms of reference to fulfil that promise.
I know that there are those who feel that the inquiry has not sufficiently recognised their loss or listened to them in the way that they feel appropriate but I hope that they will better understand, as the inquiry progresses, the very difficult balance I have had to strike.
I hope they will understand when they see the results of the work we are doing that I am listening to them.
Their loss will be recognised.
She says the inquiry will shortly play a 17-minute video about the impact of the pandemic. It is very moving, she says. She says people in the room who do not want to watch are free to leave.
Updated
Hallett confirms the inquiry will be publishing interim reports as it goes along
Hallett says that she hopes that the inquiry’s recommendations will over time “save lives and reduce suffering in the future”.
She also confirms that she intends to publish reports as she goes along. She says:
My plan, as people now know, is to publish reports as we go along. So that when the hearings for this module finish, work will begin on preparing the report for this module. When that report is ready, it will be published. In the meantime, the other module teams and I will be working on the next modules.
Updated
Heather Hallett sets our three key questions she wants Covid inquiry she is chairing to answer
Heather Hallett, the inquiry chair, is opening the hearing. There is a live feed at the top of the blog.
She starts by referencing the vigil by relatives of people who have been outside the inquiry building. Their grief was obvious, she says. She says on behalf of those people she intends to answer three questions.
Was the UK properly prepared for a pandemic?
Was the response to it appropriate?
And can we learn lessons for the future?
She says an “extraordinary amount of work” has already been done by the inquiry team.
Q: Do you use ChatGPT and what do you ask it?
Starmer says he has a 14-year-old son who gives him a “masterclass” on this every day. He does not see it as outlandish. He thinks of its as something that will be part of his life. What it can do is incredible.
But Starmer also says he sees the potential impact of AI in his work all the time. For example, he recently talked about how it can be used to improve scanning for cancer, he says.
Starmer says Tory 'political tantrums' are damaging reputation of UK and deterring investors
Keir Starmer is speaking at London Tech Week now. There is a live feed here.
He says this time last year Boris Johnson was PM. Now we are on our third PM, and our fourth chancellor since then, he says. And we have three byelections just caused by political fallout. Essentially they have been caused by “political tantrums”, he says. He says that is “unprecedented”.
There is a price, he says. People want government to focus on the cost of living, not issues like this.
And he says disruption likes this affects the reputation of the UK. And it deters investors.
Q: What effect will the implosion of the SNP have?
Starmer says the implosion of the SNP has been profound. It has had two effects.
First, it has led to the SNP’s record in government being examined. And it is not very good, he says.
And he says people are open to listening to Labour’s case as to what it could do for Scotland.
Starmer says government needs to operate with 'Labour values' to ensure everyone benefits from AI revolution
Keir Starmer is giving a speech to the London Tech Week conference this morning. According to extracts released in advance, he will argue that artificial intelligence will pose challenges that will require “Labour values” from government if it is going to ensure that everyone benefits. He will say:
Our country is facing a choice about who benefits from the huge disruption that tech will bring. Will it be those who already hold wealth and power, or will it be the starter firms trying to break in and disrupt the industry, the patients trying to book at appointment with their GP, the worker using technology to enhance and improve their role …
The question facing our country is who will benefit from this disruption? Will it leave some behind, as happened with de-industrialisation across vast swathes of our country? Or can it help build a society where everyone is included, and inequalities are narrowed not widened?
This moment calls for Labour values, of working in partnership with business, driving technology to the public good, and ensuring people and places aren’t left behind. Labour would take a whole-economy approach, recognising that tech is not just a sector, but every job and every business must become digital if we are to address the UK’s productivity problem. Diffusing the latest technology across our economy and public services will be as important as supporting the latest unicorns.
Updated
Three years 'far too long' for Covid inquiry, says former health minister Lord Bethell
Three years of public hearings by the Covid inquiry is “far too long” according to a Tory peer who served as a health minister over the period examined and who warned this morning that Britain had now “gone backwards” in terms of planning for a future pandemic.
Lord Bethell told Sky News:
The desire to answer the concerns of families is entirely right but there are practical matters for what should be done in preparing this country for another pandemic that is likely some time in the future.
“That work should be done today and it’s taking far too long to learn the practical lessons of the mistakes we made the first time round.
The peer was speaking ahead of the beginning this morning of public hearings by the UK’s Covid Inquiry, which is initially looking at pandemic preparedness.
But while the inquiry is not due to conclude hearings until 2026, new mistakes had already been made, he said, pointing to the dismantlement of testing facilities while surveillance was “not good enough”. He went on:
We have gone backwards rather than forwards in terms of planning for any future pandemic. We do not have a good pandemic plan in place.
Updated
The deputy leader of the SNP, Keith Brown, has insisted that Humza Yousaf is “sticking to principles of natural justice” as he resists demands to suspend his predecessor Nicola Sturgeon.
Yousaf has refused to bow to calls from opposition and a handful of SNP politicians to remove the whip from Sturgeon or suspend her membership following her arrest on Sunday as party of the ongoing investigation into the party’s finances.
Brown told BBC Radio Scotland:
Nicola Sturgeon has not been charged, she has not been accused of anything, the arrest I appreciate is a dramatic thing to have happened and its perhaps not well understood that arrest is to ensure the interview and information gathering is put on to a formal footing.
Asked about instances within the SNP of Sturgeon suspending Margaret Ferrier, Michelle Thomson and others because of their involvement with police investigations, Brown said “there are different circumstances in each of these cases”.
Brown said it was “fairly straightforward” that Yousaf had said he was not taking steps to suspend Sturgeon. Asked if there needed to be a more transparent process rather than simply having the first minister making the decision, Brown said Yousaf had taken early action to review governance and transparency in the SNP.
Brown said he had not spoken to Sturgeon in the last few days but that she had made a “very strong defence of her position” in the statement she posted immediately following her release that protested her innocence.
Updated
Covid inquiry begins evidence-gathering stage of hearings
Good morning. Today marks the start of an event that will be in the news, and will dominate public policy thinking, for years. The Covid inquiry has been up and running since last year. But until now all the public hearings have been on procedural matters. This morning marks the start of the evidence-gathering stage of hearings and, after an opening statement this morning from Heather Hallett, the chair, and statements from counsel for the core participants, the first witnesses will be up tomorrow. These hearings focus on “resilience and preparedness” and the really interesting hearings will start next week, when David Cameron, George Osborne and Jeremy Hunt are expected to appear.
Yesterday Boris Johnson formally resigned as an MP, ending, or reducing, his exposure to parliamentary scrutiny. But the inquiry may expose him to a more intense level of scrutiny than he has faced before.
Public inquiries of this kind always take years, and so Johnson and other ministers may be assuming that judgment day will be some way off. But, as Paul Waugh pointed out in an i column recently, that would be to misunderstand how this inquiry is operating. He explained:
Crucially, some critics have missed the simple fact that the modular nature of this inquiry means that Hallett and her team will be making regular reports after each (a few months apart), complete with recommendations for action as well as key findings. Unlike the Chilcot inquiry into Iraq, there won’t be years of evidence and then “one big” report in 2026.
Here is Robert Booth’s guide to how the inquiry will operate.
And here is Nimo Omer’s guide to some of the wider issues at stake.
The inquiry proceedings get going as the Johnson “clown show” (as Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar calls it) continues to preoccupy the Conservative party – and most of the rest of Westminster too. I’ll be covering that as well.
Here is the agenda for the day.
Morning: Rishi Sunak chairs cabinet.
9.30am: Keir Starmer gives a speech at London Tech Week.
10am: Heather Hallett, chair of the Covid inquiry, opens the evidence-taking stage of its work with a statement. Then there will be opening statements from counsel. The first witnesses will appear tomorrow.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
Afternoon: Peers will debate the Public Order Act 1986 (serious disruption to the life of the community) regulations 2023, a new law that that makes it easier for the police to stop peaceful protests, and a motion tabled by the Green peer Jenny Jones to block the regulations.
If you want to contact me, do try the “send us a message” feature. You’ll see it just below the byline – on the left of the screen, if you are reading on a PC or a laptop. This is for people who want to message me directly. I find it very useful when people message to point out errors (even typos – no mistake is too small to correct). Often I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either in the comments below the line, privately (if you leave an email address and that seems more appropriate), or in the main blog, if I think it is a topic of wide interest.
Updated
