response to covid—19, from decisions taken over lockdown, to testing — and the outbreak in care homes. and what should the uk have learnt from other countries? that's all coming up later in this edition. first, china has released details of its controversial new security law for hong kong. we knew this was coming, but details of the legislation were only published after it came into effect. we now know that the crimes of secession, terrorism, and subversion will be punished with up to life in prison. companies or groups which violate the law will be fined and could face suspension of operations. china is also setting up a national security agency in hong kong. beijing has called it a "sword hanging over the heads" of those who threatened national security. critics say it will erode hong kong's way of life, including many freedoms. pro—democracy campaigner joshua wong describes it as the "end of hong kong, beginning of reign of terror." hong kong's chief executive, carrie lam doesn't agree. the question of how long we could tolerate such a gaping hole in national security has to be asked and answered. for those foreign governments and politicians raising objections to the legislation, one could only lament the double standards they are adopting. this is all happening in the context of 1997 — this is when hong kong was handed back to china from british control — and began life under a agreement widely known as "one country, two systems". this protects certain freedoms in hong kong that did not exist in mainland china. here's more from the bbc‘s steve mcdonell in beijing. here in the chinese capital behind closed doors, standing committee delegates have rubber—stamped through this new law without dissenting voice. for china's leader, xijinping, whatever the promises made at the time of handover, these western notions of free speech, of liberty have essentially poisoned hong kong. he doesn't care that this new law will be seen by some as changing that place forever, because that's what he wants. to drag that rebellious city back into the arms of the motherland — whether its residents like it or not. next, this is howard zhang of bbc chinese, with more detail about the new legislation. in many ways, almost every aspect of hong kong life will change from now on. even nonviolent acts can be considered to breach national security, as well as foreign media and the behaviour of foreign media organisations. well, already hong kong activists have deleted social media profiles and closed down some campaign groups. here's the reactionjimmy lai — who's one of the most vocal anti—government critics and the founder of hong kong's biggest tabloid newspaper, apple daily. it spells the death knell of hong kong. the most tragic thing is for the youth. i'm 72, i don't have much time left, you know, to face a place without the rule of law. but those young people have to face a future without the protection of the rule of law and freedom. this is the other side of the argument. these are pro—beijing supporters who gathered in front of hong kong's government headquarters to celebrate the new law. let's hear more from those in support. what happens in hong kong since last year is an uncontrollable waste of terrorism going on, riots, and so—called democracy movement. it does not affect anything that's related to — like you cannot have freedom of assembly, or anything like that, you can still go on. you can still apply with the hong kong police, and they can approve and things like that. so it does not stop you from having all those. well as china knew it would, this has prompted an international outcry. nato, the uk, and japan have all condemned the law — so has the eu. the new legislation does not conform with hong kong's basic law, nor with china's international commitments both in terms of adoption procedure and in substance. so we are very clear on that topic that is very critical, and we are seriously concerned about it. the united states has also condemned the law and, as it warned it would, has started to revoke hong kong's special trade status. the white house said in a statement... it is 100 days since boris johnson announced that he was introducing a lockdown. in those 100 days, the uk has been affected by covid—19 far more than most. and we wanted take time for a detailed look at the decisions that were taken around lockdown, around testing — and around care homes for the elderly where the virus has taken a particularly terrible toll. so for the next ten minutes or so we'll do just that. to start it's useful to compare the uk with three other western european nations of roughly the same size. italy, which was the first to be badly hit by the virus. france and also germany, which has seen much lowerfigures. as the pandemic unfolded in march, the uk was consistently around two weeks behind italy. but it soon caught up — and then overtook italy. asjune ends, the recorded death toll in the uk is 43,730. that figure is higher than the recorded deaths in any other country in europe. now, uk government has resisted consistently resisted these comparisons. this is the foreign secretary dominic raab on 5 may, the day the uk's death toll passed italy's. i don't think we'll get a real verdict on how well countries have done until the pandemic is over, and particularly until we have data on all cause mortality. well, the pandemic certainly isn't over — but we are far enough into it that we can now compare recorded deaths from all causes, and this helps us see the true scale of each country's coronovirus outbreak. let's look at the uk first. this dotted line shows the number of deaths that would usually occur. actual deaths for 2020 are marked in grey, as you can see. initially the uk was below expectations — until covid arrived. the red areas show excess deaths where the person was recorded as having covid—19. and blue shows the other excess deaths. some of these may also be from covid, others could be people dying because of restricted access to health care because of covid. add red and blue together, and you start getting as a clear picture as we can. based on these calculations — and adjusted for population — the uk has seen more excess deaths than any other country in the g7 group of industrialised nations. that includes italy, france and germany. here's the bbc‘s health of statistics robert cuffe. there are caveats to any international comparison, but probably fewer caveats than there were a couple weeks ago, especially when you use the right data. the thing about looking at the patterns and the total number of deaths that is not subject to the same differences between the countries in how they record covid deaths or coronavirus deaths, and how good they are at capturing that. it's a big improvement when you look at that, particularly when you look at the data now and you see that a lot of countries like the uk, italy and many others are through that first wave of the epidemic. deaths peaked in the middle of spring and they've been coming down ever since, and the total number of deaths we're seeing in those countries is probably in and around what we expect to see at this time of year. so that picture of the total number of deaths pictured is pretty stable now and not likely to change unless anything really radical happens. so once you've got those two things, you are in a position where you can start to look back at the first wave and see who's been hardest hit. and that's a starting point for looking at the differences between those countries and why those differences occur. so why did it happen? why has the uk had europe's worst outbreak? well, there are lots of factors that can make a country more susceptible to coronavirus. the uk's high death toll may be connected to high levels of obesity, it may be connected to london being an international travel hub. and government decisions may also have contributed. the uk's first death from coronavirus was recorded on 5 march.