we shouldn't cut taxes. it's been that we could only cut taxes once we have controlled inflation and debt. first cut inflation, then cut taxes. and that's why i made a promise to have inflation and the official statistics show that promise has now been met. so now that inflation has halved, and our growth is stronger, meaning revenues are higher, we can begin the next phase and turn our attention to cutting tax. we will do this in a serious, responsible way, based on fiscal rules to deliver sound money and alongside the independent forecast of the office for budget responsibility. that was the prime minister, _ for budget responsibility. that was the prime minister, rishi _ for budget responsibility. that was the prime minister, rishi sunak. i for budget responsibility. that was| the prime minister, rishi sunak. we are also expecting to hear from chancellorjeremy hunt, addressing the cbi, the confederation of british industry is, due to address them shortly, we will bring you those comments when he does. we're also following the covid inquiry, a short break at the moment, but we have been hearing from sir patrick vallance, the chief scientific adviser during the period of the pandemic, and he told the inquiry that although there was an agreement about suppressing the virus to protect the nhs, not enough work was done about how achieve that. do you think that enough was done during february to understand what that meant and what an nhs overwhelmed would look like, what the numbers involved were? the numbers. _ the numbers involved were? the numbers, well, _ the numbers involved were? tue: numbers, well, there the numbers involved were? tte: numbers, well, there was a lot done in terms of what needed to be, what the options were to reduce the spread, so quite early in february, work started on non—pharmaceutical interventions, neil ferguson in particular drew up a lot of modelling around that, what the different options were, and came up with a figure that others indoors stop needing to get to a 75% reduction in contact in order to try and really suppress this to the right levels. there was a lot of work done on the modelling, a lot of work done on the modelling, a lot of work done on the modelling, a lot of work done exposing those options into cobra, including with the behavioural science input on that. and there was a discussion which i think borisjohnson put in his statement, which he had with the cmo at the end of february, on lockdown options and what the implications of those would be. so i think there was a lot of evidence that there were things that needed to happen in order to achieve the aim of suppressing the curve. i'm not convinced that there was a very effective operational response to that. , . ., ., ., ., that. they had also been a lot of focus on sir _ that. they had also been a lot of focus on sir patrick's _ that. they had also been a lot of focus on sir patrick's private - focus on sir patrick's private diary, which he said he wrote in evening's to decompress and benefit is mental health, a diary which has been referenced a lot during previous hearings, and one line that came out today was that sir patrick wrote in the diary that the then prime minister, borisjohnson, prime minister, boris johnson, looked prime minister, borisjohnson, looked broken, he had his head in his hands a lot, sir patrick wrote, in the september of 2020. during evidence this afternoon, he has also talked about friction with sir chris whitty, the then chief medical adviser, about when to lock the country down. t adviser, about when to lock the country down-— adviser, about when to lock the country down. i think chris whitty is a ublic country down. i think chris whitty is a public health _ country down. i think chris whitty is a public health specialist, - country down. i think chris whitty is a public health specialist, and i is a public health specialist, and he was rightly, in my opinion, concerned about the adverse effects of the npis. he was concerned that they would be more than just the issue of the direct cause of death from the virus, that there would be indirect causes of death due to effects on the nhs, that there would be indirect harm is due to people isolating, mental health, loneliness, issues of health that come from that procedure, and that there would be indirect long term consequences due to the economic impacts creating poverty, which is a major driver of health. so he was definitely of the view that the treatment and the result of that treatment and the result of that treatment is needed to be considered together. and that pulling the trigger to do things too early could lead to adverse consequences. and that, i think, lead to adverse consequences. and that, ithink, is lead to adverse consequences. and that, i think, is a totally appropriate worry from the chief medical officer, and a legitimate public health concern throughout. and i didn't have exactly the same worry, i was more on the side of we need to move on this, but i think thatis need to move on this, but i think that is partly why the two of us found it useful to work together. that was sir patrick speaking earlier today. that was sir patrick speaking earliertoday. i that was sir patrick speaking earlier today. i can see that the inquiry has resumed after a coffee break, let's cross live. a very difficult question for an elected representative to come out and answer, but nevertheless, it is and answer, but nevertheless, it is a central point for you as a scientific adviser, isn't it? tt a central point for you as a scientific adviser, isn't it? it is, a lot follows _ scientific adviser, isn't it? it is, a lot follows from _ scientific adviser, isn't it? it is, a lot follows from that. - scientific adviser, isn't it? it is,| a lot follows from that. indeed, scientific adviser, isn't it? it is, - a lot follows from that. indeed, and so central that _ a lot follows from that. indeed, and so central that by _ a lot follows from that. indeed, and so central that by april, _ a lot follows from that. indeed, and so central that by april, you - a lot follows from that. indeed, and so central that by april, you and - a lot follows from that. indeed, and so central that by april, you and i i so central that by april, you and i think professor sir chris whitty provided an advice paper about different approaches, and you refer to it in your statement as hot or cold policy or somewhere in the middle. and you are explaining to government in april how important it is that first of all they have a strategy, but also that you as advisers know about it, yes? yes. and the question _ advisers know about it, yes? yes. and the question was _ advisers know about it, yes? 133 and the question was never answered through the whole period, was it? not without specificity. find through the whole period, was it? not without specificity.— through the whole period, was it? not without specificity. and that is wh , auoin not without specificity. and that is why. going back — not without specificity. and that is why. going back to _ not without specificity. and that is why, going back to your— not without specificity. and that is | why, going back to your statement, just for the record, paragraph 406, you are dealing with lessons learnt from the second lockdown, first observation is that the first lesson that should have been learned was the same should have been learned from the first wave, go earlier, harder, broader on the introduction of npis. yes? harder, broader on the introduction of npis- yes?— of npis. yes? that is a clear lesson- _ of npis. yes? that is a clear lesson. and _ of npis. yes? that is a clear lesson. and your _ of npis. yes? that is a clear lesson. and your second - of npis. yes? that is a clear. lesson. and your second lesson of npis. yes? that is a clear- lesson. and your second lesson was the way he — lesson. and your second lesson was the way he returned _ lesson. and your second lesson was the way he returned to _ lesson. and your second lesson was the way he returned to this - lesson. and your second lesson was the way he returned to this issue, i the way he returned to this issue, and you said there was a need to establish some greater degree of clarity on the level of mortality and morbidity that the government and morbidity that the government and society were willing to accept, end quote. and that there is book ending it, february, and then looking at your observations on the second wave, the same concern, you are not being provided with the strategy and that makes it much more difficult for you as advisers to give advice in good time so that swift, real—time, efficientand effective decisions can be taken, is that a fair summary? t effective decisions can be taken, is that a fair summary?— that a fair summary? i think it was illustrated in _ that a fair summary? i think it was illustrated in the _ that a fair summary? i think it was illustrated in the quotes _ that a fair summary? i think it was illustrated in the quotes that - that a fair summary? i think it was illustrated in the quotes that we i illustrated in the quotes that we saw of me asking, what is the prime minister's aim and objective? so saw of me asking, what is the prime minister's aim and objective? minister's aim and ob'ective? so the answer to minister's aim and ob'ective? so the arnsew to my _ minister's aim and objective? so the answer to my question _ minister's aim and objective? so the answer to my question is _ minister's aim and objective? so the answer to my question is yes? - minister's aim and objective? so the answer to my question is yes? yes. | minister's aim and objective? so the | answer to my question is yes? yes. i will come to — answer to my question is yes? yes. i will come to one _ answer to my question is yes? te; i will come to one more answer to my question is yes? te3 i will come to one more of answer to my question is yes? t;é:3 i will come to one more of those messages in a minute, but before i do, in order to give proper scientific advice, you have to research, you have to model, and thatis research, you have to model, and that is the only way that you can provide very fast, real—time advice, is that right? provide very fast, real-time advice, is that right?_ is that right? well, the only way to rovide is that right? well, the only way to provide real-time _ is that right? well, the only way to provide real-time advice _ is that right? well, the only way to provide real-time advice is - is that right? well, the only way to provide real-time advice is to - is that right? well, the only way to provide real-time advice is to build provide real—time advice is to build on the knowledge that you have at that moment. on the knowledge that you have at that moment-— on the knowledge that you have at that moment. , , . ., that moment. yes, but in the context of an overall — that moment. yes, but in the context of an overall strategy? _ that moment. yes, but in the context of an overall strategy? yes. - that moment. yes, but in the context of an overall strategy? yes. so - that moment. yes, but in the context of an overall strategy? yes. so you i of an overall strategy? yes. so you have already _ of an overall strategy? yes. so you have already told _ of an overall strategy? tez3 so you have already told us that eat out of an overall strategy? t33 so you have already told us that eat out to help out, you didn't know anything about this policy decision until after it had been taken. correct. you have also _ after it had been taken. correct. you have also told _ after it had been taken. correct. you have also told us _ after it had been taken. correct. you have also told us that - after it had been taken. correct. you have also told us that it - you have also told us that it inevitably increased the number of infections and therefore it must follow, mustn't it, it must have increased the number of deaths? tt is highly likely to have done so. yes. and you say in paragraph 348, just for the record, that you have, quote, no doubt that the decision makers would have understood the general advice that i and others had given before the introduction of the scheme, that it would increase viral transmission, potentially quite substantially, and quote. so you are saying that although you were not asked to advise, even though you have no doubt that those who took the decision understood is the general points about the increase of transmissibility, is that right? t transmissibility, is that right? i think i answered that early on as well, that it must be the case, because it was a complete turn on its head of the public health advice. in its head of the public health advice. , :, :, :, :, advice. in the next, you go on to sa that advice. in the next, you go on to say that these — advice. in the next, you go on to say that these principles, - advice. in the next, you go on to say that these principles, and i advice. in the next, you go on to | say that these principles, and i'm quoting, these principles were clear and had to be discussed with ministers in cabinet, and that it was entirely predictable. so you are not leaving much room for doubt about about the effect of eat out to help out, but also that ministers were aware of what its likely effect would be. :. were aware of what its likely effect would be. :, ., , were aware of what its likely effect would be. :, . v, , , were aware of what its likely effect would be. v, v v, , , would be. that was certainly my view when i would be. that was certainly my view when i wrote — would be. that was certainly my view when i wrote that, _ would be. that was certainly my view when i wrote that, yes. _ would be. that was certainly my view when i wrote that, yes. that - would be. that was certainly my view when i wrote that, yes. that is - would be. that was certainly my view when i wrote that, yes. that is very l when i wrote that, yes. that is very clear, when i wrote that, yes. that is very clear. thank — when i wrote that, yes. that is very clear, thank you _ when i wrote that, yes. that is very clear, thank you very _ when i wrote that, yes. that is very clear, thank you very much. - when i wrote that, yes. that is very clear, thank you very much. the . clear, thank you very much. the second point relates to a notebook entry, a diary entry of the 11th of october, and it is again picking up from a topic that mr o'connor has dealt with, and i do want to put this on screen, please, 273—901, page 220. and i think it bears reading. press conference tomorrow, 11th of october 2020, press conference tomorrow, i am now dropped in favour of the chancellor of the exchequer, good, they need to understand that they need to only are making. being asked to approve the measure is knowing that it is not enough, gave the example of bolton, but only because hospitality fully closed, this is a massive abrogation of responsibility. you go on to deal with individual ministers and what you thought of their positions. and then you referred to the fact that this is relating to, i think, a zoom meeting, and you say that whilst waiting, someone clearly not on mute, baby crying, and then she starts singing the wheels on the bus, somehow shambolic of the shambles. pm said on call that the package we have as a baseline is unlikely to get r less than one unless local leads go further, hancock says this is our last shot at avoiding local lockdown, me us mice from cabinet ministers. again, for context, this is referring to the fact that the ministerial and officials meeting had been looking at a package of measures which were not consistent with the september sage 58 meeting advice, and that advice had been this robust call for advice had been this robust call for a circuit breaker, and a suite of npis given the resurgence of covid at the time. t npis given the resurgence of covid at the time-— at the time. i think this is a discussion _ at the time. i think this is a discussion of— at the time. i think this is a discussion of low _ at the time. i think this is a discussion of low -- - at the time. i think this is a discussion of low -- tiers, l at the time. i think this is a i discussion of low -- tiers, and it discussion of low —— tiers, and it was clear that they were not going to be enough to keep r below one, as the prime minister says. so to be enough to keep r below one, as the prime minister says.— the prime minister says. so your frustration _ the prime minister says. so your frustration is _ the prime minister says. so your frustration is that _ the prime minister says. so your frustration is that sage - the prime minister says. so your frustration is that sage has i the prime minister says. so your| frustration is that sage has given forceful advice but what is actually required is a circuit breaker, and they are still discussing, ministers involved, about trying to make an alternative suite of measures work, and your frustration is that they are ignoring site and trying to follow a course that will not work. i think the message is not so much around a circuit breaker but the tiers need to be stricter at the top end if they are going to have an impact, and this is me in the evening referring to my frustration that that is very clear and the prime minister says as much, r will not go below one unless local leaders go further than the tier system. come out so a very strong view that, first of all, the system. come out so a very strong view that, first of all,— view that, first of all, the press conference _ view that, first of all, the press conference which _ view that, first of all, the press conference which you _ view that, first of all, the press conference which you thought l view that, first of all, the press i conference which you thought you were down to do was now going to be dealt with by a minister, the chancellor, mr sunak, and you are happy about that, because you didn't want to be putting across this view that was contrary to the scientific advice that had been given to government. t advice that had been given to government-— advice that had been given to government. i think these are different sections _ government. i think these are different sections stitched i different sections stitched together, so i'm not quite sure how they flow on in terms of thinking, but i wouldn't have wanted to be in the press conference, and i would have said r will not be brought below one, i think i did it at other press conferences. so below one, i think i did it at other press conferences.— press conferences. so you are clearly saying _ press conferences. so you are clearly saying that _ press conferences. so you are clearly saying that ministers l press conferences. so you are i clearly saying that ministers should only decisions where they are standing away from the scientific advice that you were conveying to them. :. . advice that you were conveying to them. v, , v v, , advice that you were conveying to them. v, , ~ advice that you were conveying to them. v, , : them. that is the case. and you were sa in: in them. that is the case. and you were saying in forthright _ them. that is the case. and you were saying in forthright terms _ them. that is the case. and you were saying in forthright terms a _ them. that is the case. and you were saying in forthright terms a massive i saying in forthright terms a massive abro . ation saying in forthright terms a massive abrogation of _ saying in forthright terms a massive abrogation of responsibility, - saying in forthright terms a massive abrogation of responsibility, that i abrogation of responsibility, that is the only way you can read that, isn't it? :. . is the only way you can read that, isn't it? v, , v, , v, , , is the only way you can read that, isn't it? v, , v, , , v, isn't it? that is obviously what i thou . ht isn't it? that is