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? . ., , , ~ this time? it certainly sounds like it from that _ this time? it certainly sounds like it from that. there _ this time? it certainly sounds like it from that. there are _ this time? it certainly sounds like it from that. there are many - this time? it certainly sounds like | it from that. there are many other entries in your _ it from that. there are many other entries in your diaries _ it from that. there are many other entries in your diaries which - entries in your diaries which referred to mr hancock, sir patrick, and you will know that some of the evidence has heard from others that they did not find, during this period, mr hancock to be a reliable, trustworthy colleague. i don't want to take you through a whole load of unnecessary references. perhaps you can summarise your understanding, your experience of working with mr hancock in that sense. i your experience of working with mr hancock in that sense.— your experience of working with mr hancock in that sense. i think there is one entry. _ hancock in that sense. i think there is one entry. i _ hancock in that sense. i think there is one entry, i think— hancock in that sense. i think there is one entry, i think you _ hancock in that sense. i think there is one entry, i think you had - hancock in that sense. i think there is one entry, i think you had a - is one entry, i think you had a habit of saying things which he didn't have a basis for, and he would say things too enthusiastically, too early, without the evidence to back them up, and then have to backtrack from them days later. i don't know to what extent that was overenthusiasm versus deliberate, i think a lot of it was over enthusiasm, but he definitely said things which surprised me, cos i knew that the evidence base was not there. edd evidence base was not there. sad thin that evidence base was not there. sad thing that were not true? yeah. —— said things that were not true? looking a little further ahead, as we know, and i will come to ask you in a moment, later on in 2020, there was the second lockdown and then the third lockdown injanuary 2021, and moving forward still, a process of unlocking and removing restrictions as one went into the spring and early summer of 2021. one of the risks that was going to be fazed by the population at that stage, in particular the younger population, was a risk of lung covid. do you think that that risk was flagged sufficiently, taking into account sufficiently, taking into account sufficiently by policymakers in that later period? it sufficiently by policymakers in that later period?— later period? it was definitely flat ted, later period? it was definitely flagged. it — later period? it was definitely flagged. it was _ later period? it was definitely flagged, it was a _ later period? it was definitely flagged, it was a real- later period? it was definitely flagged, it was a real issue, | later period? it was definitely i flagged, it was a real issue, and later period? it was definitely - flagged, it was a real issue, and by that stage, the unlocking in 2021, that stage, the unlocking in 2021, that was done much better than the previous unlocking, and it was properly monitored with proper gaps in between the stages and next stage, and indeed there were examples where the stages were pushed back further in order to allow the prevalence not to rise too high, so i thought that was a much better process and more structured, and kept prevalence lower than it otherwise would be. i don't know to what extent long covid was factored into the thinking of policymakers are not. ,., . ~ into the thinking of policymakers are not. . ~ ., , ., are not. going back to the period we were looking — are not. going back to the period we were looking at, _ are not. going back to the period we were looking at, then, _ are not. going back to the period we were looking at, then, and - are not. going back to the period we were looking at, then, and the - were looking at, then, and the second half of 2020, we know, we have seen references in the diary roads and similar that we have looked at, you have explained prevalence was increasing over the summer and prevalence was increasing over the summerand into prevalence was increasing over the summer and into the autumn, the mechanisms that were put in place to react, tiers, the rule of six and so on, you may clear in your statement that from late september, the view that from late september, the view that sage was expressing was that they needed to be some sort of circuit breaker, at least to try and create a pause and reduce the prevalence. is that a fair summary of the general position? yes. what i want to do now is look at a series of entries in your notes to try and understand the sequence of events running up to the second lockdown, and so if we can start, please, by looking at the schedule that we have page 245, and this is sunday the 25th of october, and i mean, before we even look at the content, we can see that you were attending meetings and giving advice every day of the week over the period, seven days a week. yes. presumably _ period, seven days a week. yes. presumably at _ period, seven days a week. yes. presumably at least _ period, seven days a week. yes. presumably at least some - period, seven days a week. yes. presumably at least some of - period, seven days a week. yes. presumably at least some of it l presumably at least some of it working from home but nonetheless attending meetings all the time, was it a very high tempo situation? i think the seven day a week working started in february 2020 and didn't end until well into late 2021, possibly later than that. end untilwell into late 2021, possibly later than that. were you advisin: possibly later than that. were you advising and _ possibly later than that. were you advising and having _ possibly later than that. were you advising and having meetings - possibly later than that. were you i advising and having meetings with the prime minister almost on a daily basis throughout that period? mast basis throughout that period? most of it, es. basis throughout that period? most of it. yes- let's _ basis throughout that period? most of it, yes. let's look— basis throughout that period? most of it, yes. let's look at _ basis throughout that period? most of it, yes. let's look at this - basis throughout that period? most of it, yes. let's look at this one, i of it, yes. let's look at this one, sunday the _ of it, yes. let's look at this one, sunday the 25th, _ of it, yes. let's look at this one, sunday the 25th, as _ of it, yes. let's look at this one, sunday the 25th, as i _ of it, yes. let's look at this one, sunday the 25th, as i said, - of it, yes. let's look at this one, sunday the 25th, as i said, it - sunday the 25th, as i said, it starts with a pm at meeting, he begins to argue for letting it all rip. that was almost a term of art by that stage, perhaps it is obvious, simply removing restrictions and the great barrington proposal. irate restrictions and the great barrington proposal. restrictions and the great barrinuton --roosal. ~ . . . barrington proposal. we had had a meetin: barrington proposal. we had had a meeting with _ barrington proposal. we had had a meeting with some _ barrington proposal. we had had a meeting with some external - barrington proposal. we had had a i meeting with some external scientist advised him to discuss that, and that was very prominent in much of the process, letting it rip became the process, letting it rip became the expression that people used. the prime minister saying, yes, there will be more casualties, but so be it. and you have put, quotes, they have had a good innings. we have seen other references of a similar nature. was this something that the prime minister returned to from time to time, the idea that the casualties of letting it rip would be older and perhaps special circumstances, that they should not so much concern that should be had about casualties of that age, is that what he was trying to say? i think it is important to note that he might have easily said the following day, i want no deaths at all. ~ . ., ., ., all. well, we will come to that. yes, he all. well, we will come to that. yes. he must _ all. well, we will come to that. yes, he must have _ all. well, we will come to that. yes, he must have said - all. well, we will come to that. yes, he must have said that. all. well, we will come to that. yes, he must have said that oni all. well, we will come to that. - yes, he must have said that on that day. pa. yes, he must have said that on that da . �* . yes, he must have said that on that da . �* , ., ~ yes, he must have said that on that da. , ., ~ day. a few lines down, the pm back on to most — day. a few lines down, the pm back on to most people _ day. a few lines down, the pm back on to most people who _ day. a few lines down, the pm back on to most people who die - day. a few lines down, the pm back on to most people who die have - on to most people who die have reached the time anyway. would these be examples of notes you made at the time? . . be examples of notes you made at the time? , ., , .,,._ be examples of notes you made at the time? , ., ,, time? these are probably scribbled notes i wrote _ time? these are probably scribbled notes i wrote on _ time? these are probably scribbled notes i wrote on papers _ time? these are probably scribbled notes i wrote on papers at - time? these are probably scribbled notes i wrote on papers at the - notes i wrote on papers at the meeting. pa. notes i wrote on papers at the meetinu. �* . notes i wrote on papers at the meetinu. �* , ., ~ meeting. a few lines down, the pm concludes. — meeting. a few lines down, the pm concludes. it _ meeting. a few lines down, the pm concludes, it looks _ meeting. a few lines down, the pm concludes, it looks like _ meeting. a few lines down, the pm concludes, it looks like we - meeting. a few lines down, the pm concludes, it looks like we are - meeting. a few lines down, the pm concludes, it looks like we are in i meeting. a few lines down, the pm concludes, it looks like we are in a| concludes, it looks like we are in a really tough spot, complete shambles, i don't want to do another national lockdown, this is the 25th of october, so for about a month by now the sage advice essentially had been that a circuit breaker lockdown was needed, and then i am looking at the last nine, dominic cummings thinks rishi thinksjust the last nine, dominic cummings thinks rishi thinks just let people die and that is ok. and this feels like a complete lack of leadership, is that your point at the end? i think so. is that your point at the end? i think so- ls — is that your point at the end? i think so. is this _ is that your point at the end? i think so. is this one _ is that your point at the end? i think so. is this one of- is that your point at the end? i think so. is this one of your i is that your point at the end? i l think so. is this one of your late niuht think so. is this one of your late night furious — think so. is this one of your late night furious thinking, - think so. is this one of your late night furious thinking, or - think so. is this one of your late - night furious thinking, or something that you would stand by now? well. that you would stand by now? well, it must have — that you would stand by now? well, it must have felt _ that you would stand by now? well, it must have felt like _ that you would stand by now? well, it must have felt like a _ that you would stand by now? -ii it must have felt like a complete lack of leadership on that day, and reading it, it feels like quite a shambolic day. find reading it, it feels like quite a shambolic day.— reading it, it feels like quite a shambolic day. reading it, it feels like quite a shambolic da . �* ., , , shambolic day. and to put things in context, shambolic day. and to put things in context. that _ shambolic day. and to put things in context, that is _ shambolic day. and to put things in context, that is dominic— shambolic day. and to put things in context, that is dominic cummings| context, that is dominic cummings saying _ context, that is dominic cummings saying they thought that people should — saying they thought that people should die, you didn't hear that from _ should die, you didn't hear that from rishi _ should die, you didn't hear that from rishi sunak himself? that is what dominic _ from rishi sunak himself? that is what dominic cummings - from rishi sunak himself? that is what dominic cummings said. - what dominic cummings said. reported, yes. let'sjust move what dominic cummings said. reported, yes. let's just move on what dominic cummings said. reported, yes. let'sjust move on in the sequence, in the reported, yes. let's 'ust move on in the sequence, in the— the sequence, in the transcript, we can see the — the sequence, in the transcript, we can see the full _ the sequence, in the transcript, we can see the full record _ the sequence, in the transcript, we can see the full record of— the sequence, in the transcript, we can see the full record of the - can see the full record of the notes, notjust the extracts can see the full record of the notes, not just the extracts for the next few days, because as you say, there were changes, so if we can look at the 240, please, yes, thank you. we see a data disappearing off the top, this is the next day, the monday. as you say, sir patrick, you have recorded the prime minister is in a different mood, terrible, terrible, terrible numbers, says we need to do local lockdown is fast, foot to the throttle, accelerate. he is so inconsistent. so the previous day, letting it rip, this day, something very different by the look of it. . something very different by the look of it. yes. and then, if we can go on to the — of it. yes. and then, if we can go on to the next _ of it. yes. and then, if we can go on to the next page, _ of it. yes and then, if we can go on to the next page, please, there is a similar observation on sunday, all the prime minister wanted was a series of mutually incompatible outcomes, said simon case privately, i think that is his comment. a couple of lines further down, we are into the next day, tuesday, you record the number of deaths. this takes us to a comment you made this morning, which is to compare what was happening in october with what was happening in october with what was happening in the run—up to the first lockdown, when of course there were far fewer deaths at that stage than there were by then. i were far fewer deaths at that stage than there were by then.— were far fewer deaths at that stage than there were by then. i think, on the 16th than there were by then. i think, on the 1tith of — than there were by then. i think, on the 16th of march, _ than there were by then. i think, on the 16th of march, there _ than there were by then. i think, on the 16th of march, there was - the 16th of march, there was something like 51 deaths, and now we were talking about nearly 400 per day. were talking about nearly 400 per da . �* , ., were talking about nearly 400 per da .�* ., ., day. and your observation, everything _ day. and your observation, everything we _ day. and your observation, everything we say - day. and your observation, everything we say it - day. and your observation, everything we say it is - day. and your observation, - everything we say it is happening but still no action, is that a reference to advice you had given, well, tell us dating back how long? i think it dated back from a press conference that chris whitty and i had done on the 21st of september, andindeed had done on the 21st of september, and indeed to many sage papers and spy and indeed to many sage papers and spy on papers that come out in the meantime. —— spi—m. you spy on papers that come out in the meantime. -- spi-m._ spy on papers that come out in the meantime. -- spi-m. you said the pm dashboard, — meantime. -- spi-m. you said the pm dashboard. was _ meantime. -- spi-m. you said the pm dashboard, was that _ meantime. -- spi-m. you said the pm dashboard, was that a _ meantime. -- spi-m. you said the pm dashboard, was that a meeting - meantime. -- spi-m. you said the pm dashboard, was that a meeting with i dashboard, was that a meeting with the prime minister?— the prime minister? there was a mornin: the prime minister? there was a morning meeting _ the prime minister? there was a morning meeting just _ the prime minister? there was a morning meeting just to - the prime minister? there was a morning meeting just to go - the prime minister? there was a i morning meeting just to go through numbers and have an update called the dashboard meeting. pm completely obsessed with — the dashboard meeting. pm completely obsessed with testing _ the dashboard meeting. pm completely obsessed with testing as _ the dashboard meeting. pm completely obsessed with testing as the _ obsessed with testing as the solution, even as the numbers are so bad that it is obvious more action is needed. explain why your reflection was that testing was not an appropriate or sufficient answer to the problem at that stage. weill. to the problem at that stage. well, there was a — to the problem at that stage. well, there was a proposal _ to the problem at that stage. well, there was a proposal that _ to the problem at that stage. well, there was a proposal that was - there was a proposal that was gaining traction, which was a good one, en masse testing as a way to reduce the incidence in the population, which was everybody would test on one day, and then everyone who is positive would isolate, and that would definitely have cut things down a bit, but you have cut things down a bit, but you have to repeat it and do it several times. and as that was being worked up times. and as that was being worked up as a sort of moonshot, itjust wasn't feasible at that time, there were not enough tests, the right sort of test, it wasn't practical to do it, and i worried that, as people were looking at that as the solution, we were seeing numbers go up solution, we were seeing numbers go up anyway and there were some other things that could happen to get the numbers down. find things that could happen to get the numbers down.— things that could happen to get the numbers down. and then if we look further down _ numbers down. and then if we look further down the _ numbers down. and then if we look further down the page, _ numbers down. and then if we look further down the page, we - numbers down. and then if we look further down the page, we can - numbers down. and then if we look further down the page, we can see| numbers down. and then if we look | further down the page, we can see a line saying, a little bit further than that, yeah, no, that is fine... three lines up. the prime minister is resistant to eight national lockdown, wants to continue with regional. but then both above that and below it, there are observations by you that it is not enough to deal with areas in higher tiers, you need to deal with lower prevalence areas as well. you mentioned earlier the issue with lower prevalence areas having incidence is rising, is that what you are referring to here? yes. what you are referring to here? yes, because test. _ what you are referring to here? yes, because test, trace _ what you are referring to here? yes, because test, trace and _ what you are referring to here? is: because test, trace and isolate has a limited capacity, and it is actually rather effective when you have a low prevalence, you can keep a lid on low prevalence with that. 0nce a lid on low prevalence with that. once it gets swamped, it becomes totally irrelevant, because it has been swamped and prevalence will increase. i was worried at this time that, for all sorts of reasons, test, trace and isolate was being surged into a high prevalence areas, where it wasn't going to make any difference, and it would have been more effective to have used it widely in low prevalence areas to keep them low and dealt with high prevalence areas by other means. you say that sage urged the government to look beyond current prevalence as the trigger the point for moving between tiers, is this making the same point that one should try and keep the lower prevalence areas low, rather than just allowing them to move up? yes. just allowing them to move up? yes, unfortunately — just allowing them to move up? yes, unfortunately the _ just allowing them to move up? yes, unfortunately the tier _ just allowing them to move up? is: unfortunately the tier system was such, as i said already, many people were arguing their own areas should be in the lowest tier possible, that was the surest way to end up in a high tier. was the surest way to end up in a hiuh tier. , .,, was the surest way to end up in a hiahtier. , . high tier. over the page, please. we are still on the _ high tier. over the page, please. we are still on the wednesday. - high tier. over the page, please. we are still on the wednesday. and - are still on the wednesday. and about three lines down you have made about three lines down you have made a note, france and germany have acted, france i think took our circuit breaker idea and applied it. we sent them the papers. is that a recollection that you've now? i had oruanised recollection that you've now? i had organised meetings _ recollection that you've now? i if. organised meetings between advisors from eight different countries, we meet sometimes every week and shared information and advice.