Published1 hour agoShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingThis video can not be playedTo play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.By Kate WhannelPolitical reporterRishi Sunak has robustly defended his Eat Out To Help Out scheme, implemented in summer 2020, saying it prevented “devastating” job losses.The scheme encouraged people to attend pubs and restaurants by subsidising meals after lockdown rules were eased.Mr Sunak said it was introduced after the safe reopening of restaurants.He dismissed criticism that senior advisers were not consulted, saying they had had “ample opportunity” to raise concerns.In previous sessions of the inquiry senior scientific advisers, as well as health secretary at the time Matt Hancock, have said they were not consulted about the Eat Out To Help Out Scheme before it was announced. The inquiry has also been told that chief medical officer Sir Chris Whitty referred to the scheme as “eat out to help out the virus” and Sir Patrick Vallance – who was chief scientific adviser during Covid – said the scheme was “highly likely” to have fuelled deaths.However, Mr Sunak – who was chancellor during the pandemic – strongly backed his decision to introduce the scheme.More on Covid and the Covid InquiryDid Sunak’s Eat Out scheme help to spread Covid?Five takeaways from Boris Johnson’s evidenceWhat is the UK Covid inquiry and how long will it take?How inquiry is exposing deep flaws in Covid decision-makingThe private WhatsApp messages from inside Downing StreetWhat to do if you have Covid: Can you go to work or school?He said it was announced on 8 July and came into force at the beginning of August, and that in that period the chief medical officer had identified children returning to school, and winter, as “two significant risk moments”. “He did not mention Eat Out To Help Out,” Mr Sunak said. He also argued it was a “micro policy” introduced along with other safety measures such as table-only service, contactless payments and one-way systems. “This was a very reasonable, sensible policy intervention to help safeguard those jobs in that safe reopening.”I didn’t believe that it was a risk. I believe it was the right thing to do.”All the data, all the evidence, all the polling, all the input from those companies suggested that unless we did something, many of those jobs would have been at risk with devastating consequences for those people and their families.”He added that the evidence “conclusively demonstrates that this was in no way, shape or form responsible for a second wave”.Image source, PA MediaMr Sunak was also asked about claims the Treasury had been nicknamed the “pro-death squad” due to its stance on keeping hospitality and retail sectors open. The prime minister said that wasn’t “a fair characterisation”, adding that the Treasury had worked “very hard” and “done things to save millions of people’s livelihoods”. He argued that the sectors most impacted by the lockdown, such as retail and hospitality, were more likely to employ “the most vulnerable in society” such as those on the lowest incomes.He said trying to protect jobs in those areas was a “matter of social justice”.The inquiry has also heard criticism about Boris Johnson’s leadership style, with advisers saying he had a tendency to change his mind. However, Mr Sunak defended his former boss, saying his interactions with No 10 “felt fine” and that Mr Johnson was right to “go over the arguments”. He added he was not aware of complaints from advisers about Mr Johnson’s approach.Mr Sunak also told the inquiry: Increases in the cost of government borrowing in March 2020 caused “enormous anxiety” in the TreasuryHe saw more of Boris Johnson than his own wife during the early days of the pandemicHe was not a “prolific user” of WhatsApp and that he no longer had access to messages during the pandemic, having changed his phone “multiple times” over the past few yearsThe amount the government borrowed during lockdown led to the current record-high tax burden “which we’re grappling with today” Changes were made to the process of buying personal protective equipment that enabled “pace at the expense of the same normal amount of rigour and scrutiny that would go into those approvals”The prime minister began his evidence by saying he was “deeply sorry” to all of those who lost loved ones and family members in the pandemic.He also offered an apology to “all those who suffered in the various different ways throughout the pandemic as a result of the actions that were taken”.He added it was “important we learn the lessons so we can better prepare in the future”.

Published3 minutes agoShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingThis video can not be playedTo play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.By Kate WhannelPolitical reporter, BBC NewsEngland’s former chief medical officer Dame Sally Davies was close to tears at the Covid Inquiry as she apologised to families bereaved by the pandemic.”It wasn’t just the deaths, it was the way they died… it was harrowing and it remains horrible,” she said. She also said the UK did not have enough resilience to cope with the pandemic, with fewer doctors, nurses or hospital beds than similar countries.The inquiry is currently examining the UK’s preparedness ahead of Covid.In her evidence, Dame Sally also expressed concern about the impact of the lockdowns on children and students. “We have damaged a generation, and it is awful… watching these people struggle,” she said.The former chief medical officer told the inquiry the UK did not have plans in place to cope with a Covid pandemic, but she added “it didn’t have resilience either”.Compared with similar countries, the UK was at the bottom of the table for numbers of doctors, nurses, beds, IT units and ventilators per 100,000, she said.During questions about preparation exercises for pandemics, Dame Sally broke off to say: “Maybe this is the moment to say how sorry I am to the relatives who lost their families.””I heard a lot about it from my daughter who was on the front line as a doctor in Scotland,” she added. Dame Sally Davies was chief medical officer from 2010 and 2019 and is currently a master at Trinity College Cambridge.Ex-PM Cameron admits mistake over pandemic planningWhat is the UK Covid inquiry and how long will it take?Covid inquiry criticises government evidence The NHS crisis – decades in the makingAt the same hearing, George Osborne said his spending cuts meant the UK was better able to cope with the pandemic. The former chancellor argued that without austerity Britain would have been “more exposed” and rejected claims his approach left the health and social care “depleted” ahead of the Covid pandemic. Last week Sir Michael Marmot, a professor of epidemiology at University College London told the inquiry that the UK had entered the pandemic with “depleted” public services. Asked by inquiry lawyer Kate Blackwell KC if he agreed with the statement, Mr Osborne said: “Most certainly not, I completely reject that.”He accepted more money could have been spent on the NHS, but said as chancellor he had to balance demands for resources from other public services.”You can’t just say we like public spending to be higher without explaining where you get money from,” he told the inquiry.He said the public had elected the Conservatives to government in 2010 and 2015 knowing the party was planning to cut public spending. During the period, cuts were introduced in welfare spending, school building programs, local government, police, courts and prisons. There was also an overall squeeze on health spending. Mr Osborne – who was chancellor from 2010 to 2016 – said: “If we had not done that Britain would have been more exposed, not just to future things like the coronavirus pandemic, but indeed to the fiscal crisis which very rapidly followed in countries across Europe.”If we had not had a clear plan to put the public finances on a sustainable path then Britain might have experienced a fiscal crisis, we would not have had the fiscal space to deal with the coronavirus pandemic when it hit.” The British Medical Association said Mr Osborne’s “denial” of a connection between austerity and the impact of the pandemic on the most vulnerable was “staggering”. On Monday, the Trades Union Congress (TUC) produced a report which said austerity had led to unsafe staffing in public services leaving the UK “hugely unprepared” for Covid. During the one hour 20 minute question session, Mr Osborne was also asked about the Treasury’s planning for potential national lockdown. He said the department had plans for an outbreak of influenza but added “given what subsequently happened that was very small scale”.”There was no planning done by Treasury – or any western Treasury – for asking the entire population to stay at home for months and months on end.”If someone had said to you the UK government should be preparing for a lockdown that might last for months, then I have no doubt the Treasury would have developed schemes it did subsequently develop around the furlough and the Covid loans. “Planning could have been done for a furlough scheme in advance – I’m not clear that would have made a better furlough scheme than the one we as a country actually saw.”Earlier in the day, Sir Oliver Letwin, a senior minister in David Cameron’s government, told the inquiry a rapid turnover of civil service staff hindered the government’s ability to plan for pandemics. He also warned that the UK was “wildly under-resilient” and said there should be a minister “solely devoted” to the subject.Labour said the admissions were “too little, too late”, adding the Conservatives “cannot be trusted to protect the public from the emergencies of tomorrow”.More on this storyEx-PM Cameron admits mistake over pandemic planningPublished21 hours agoWhat is the UK Covid inquiry and how long will it take?Published5 days agoCovid inquiry criticises government evidencePublished6 June

Published19 JuneShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingBy Kate WhannelPolitical reporter, BBC NewsFormer Prime Minister David Cameron has said it was a “mistake” not to consider different types of diseases when preparing for future pandemics.Giving evidence to the Covid Inquiry, Mr Cameron said “group think” meant his government did not focus enough on pandemics other than flu. He also denied that his government’s austerity policies damaged the UK’s ability to cope with Covid.The inquiry is currently considering preparedness ahead of the pandemic.George Osborne and Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor and health secretary under Mr Cameron, will give evidence to the inquiry later this week. Questioned by the inquiry’s lawyer Kate Blackwell KC, Mr Cameron said: “Much more time was spent on pandemic flu and the dangers of pandemic flu rather than on potential pandemics of other, more respiratory diseases, like Covid turned out to be.”This is so important – so many consequences followed from that.”UK public services were ‘depleted’ when Covid hitWhat is the UK Covid inquiry and how long will it take?Covid inquiry criticises government evidence The Conservative former leader said that on becoming prime minister he had sought to improve the UK’s planning for risks by changing government structures, including by setting up a National Security Council.However, he added that there was “always a danger of group think – perhaps that is what is happening here”. “I think the failing was not to ask more questions about asymptomatic transmission.”The Inquiry also heard from Sir Chris Wormald, permanent secretary at the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC). He, too, was asked about the government’s focus on influenza preparations in its pandemic-planning. “The approach taken was essentially ready for flu, ready for anything,” he said.Clara Swinson, who has headed up the DHSC’s global health division since 2016, also spoke during Monday’s hearing. Referring to a UK-wide pandemic strategy, she said “there would’ve been some areas that were worth updating”, since the only one was from 2011.Turning to the focus on influenza, she added: “We had reflected in the new pandemic portfolio a recognition that we would like the strategy to be along all of the different routes of transmission.”Asked whether this was a mistake in hindsight, Ms Swinson said she thought it was “a reasonable decision at the time”. Image source, ShutterstockMr Cameron was also pressed on whether his austerity policies hampered the UK’s resilience when facing the pandemic.At a hearing held last week, Sir Michael Marmot, a professor of epidemiology at University College London that the UK had entered the coronavirus pandemic with “depleted” public services. Mr Cameron said he didn’t accept that description and defended the austerity drive overseen by his government.He said it was needed to get the public finances in order and without doing so there would have been less money for the NHS.”Your health system is only as strong as your economy – one pays for the other.”He also pointed out that while other public services were cut, the NHS was actually protected by his government.During his premiership, the NHS budget rose by an average of 1% to 2% after inflation. However, this compares to an average of 4% during the rest of the health service’s history – so while the budget did rise, the figure still represented a squeeze overall.And it is a major reason why waiting times have worsened and the UK has fewer staff and beds per head than many other western European countries.Other areas of health spending – such as training and public health – were not protected.However, it is worth noting the Conservatives were not alone in advocating this approach. At both the 2010 and 2015 elections Labour was not promising significantly more for the NHS.What is the UK Covid-19 inquiry?It is about going through what happened and learning lessonsNo-one will be found guilty or innocentAny recommendations made do not have to be adopted by governmentsThe inquiry has no formal deadline but is due to hold public hearings until 2026Scotland is holding a separate inquiry in addition to the wider UK oneMore on this storyUK public services were ‘depleted’ when Covid hitPublished16 JuneWhat is the UK Covid inquiry and how does it work?Published1 hour agoCovid inquiry criticises government evidencePublished6 June