Live politics: Matt Hancock Covid evidence, Alex Salmond on independence and FMQs
First Minister Humza Yousaf is set to take questions from opposition parties from noon onwards - join us to keep updated with the cut and thrust of the debates.
Live blog: Hancock inquiry, Salmond presser & FMQs
Alistair Darling has died
Former chancellor and veteran Labour politician Alistair Darling has died in Edinburgh, aged 70, a spokesperson on behalf of his family said.
More here:
Anas SarwarAlistair was a giant of the Labour movement, a titanic force for good and a man I was proud to consider a friend and a mentor.
From his time as Secretary of State for Scotland to being the Chancellor that led the UK through the financial crisis, Alistair Darling was dedicated to public service and improving the lives of those less fortunate.
At a time of division for Scotland, Alistair led the Better Together campaign with kindness, intelligence and good humour – it was a job he did not want to do, but he believed he was doing a service for Scotland.
Alistair’s life was one spent in the service of the people of Scotland and the UK – the Labour family and our country will sorely mourn his passing.”
Cummings a 'malign actor'
A second attack (or defence, depending on how you look at it) on Dominic Cummings, whom Matt Hancock accuses of creating “culture of fear” in government that undermined the pandemic response.
Hancock said Boris Johnson’s ex-chief adviser was a “malign actor” who subjected Department of Health and Social Care staff to abuse as they grappled with the emergence of Covid-19.
Hancock claimed Cummings sought to grab power from the then-prime minister while shutting out ministers from key meetings.
Cummings is, of course, following along and live-tweeting ripostes to Hancock's assertions...
'An earlier lockdown would have saved lives', admits Hancock
Matt Hancock admits lockdown should have started March 2 2020, which would have cut the death toll from the first wave by 90 per cent.
The former health secretary said, with hindsight, the government should have acted on February 28, when the government was informed Covid-19 had a one per cent fatality rate.
Hancock said that if the government had acted then, it could have imposed lockdown the following Monday - March 2.
Instead, lockdown was implemented three weeks later.
"There’s a doubling rate at this point, estimated, every three to four days," said Mr Hancok.
"We would have been six doublings ahead of where we were, which means that fewer than a tenth of the number of people would have died in the first wave."
Hancock suggests he would have saved 33,000 people
Matt Hancock tells the UK Covid Inquiry: “If we had the doctrine that I proposed, which is ‘as soon as you know you’ve got to lock down you lock down as soon as possible’, then we would have got the lockdown done over that weekend, in on the 2nd of March, three weeks earlier than before,” the ex-health secretary told the inquiry.
"Fewer than a tenth of the number of people would have died in the first wave," had the UK Government locked down then, Hancock alleges.
Imperial College London research found 36,700 died in England (and an assumed figure in Scotland & Wales proportional to population).
Matt Hancock appears to suggest that if the UK Government had followed his approach, it would have saved the lives of around 33,000 people in England.
Lockdown 'wasn't politically divisive'
On the issue of whether the lockdown was politically divisive, Matt Hancock said it had overwhelming support.
He said it “wasn’t actually politically divisive” adding that “some people forget what actually happened, but it wasn’t divisive at all”.
“There was enormous conceptual support across very large swathes of the population and almost all political leaders," he added.
“And in fact, the fact that it happened in all four nations was led by five political parties, not even four political parties, at the same time demonstrates that.”
Lockdown brought forward due to Italian pandemic
Matt Hancock tells the inquiry that the data from Italy - which experienced a very early surge of coronavirus cases and subsequent deaths - informed the UK Government's decision to lockdown when it did.
Matt HancockIf you think you’ve only got a limited period lockdown that you can put in place, the timing of that lockdown matters. And watching the Italian curve was the best way of thinking ‘what would happen here’? So the Italy data were important in that sense.
And then you had to judge, compared to where we were on Italy, were to bring in the lockdown – and indeed, we brought in the lockdown earlier in the epidemiological curve than Italy and others did.
My point is not about whether or not it’s right to base yourself off Italy. My point is the whole doctrine of waiting, sort of allowing it to come towards you and hold hold. And now we go, that was wrong.
The moment you need a lockdown, you need to lockdown.
Hancock concerned for future
Asked whether the UK is prepared for another pandemic, Hancock said he fears testing could not be ramped up quickly enough.
Hancock told the inquiry: “What happens if one of these things, one of these diseases that we’ve read about in the last couple of weeks, the influenza in northern China becomes a pandemic?
"My question now to the Secretary of State (for health) would be how quickly can we get to 100,000 tests? How quickly are we going to get a vaccine? How quickly are we going to have 5,000 people in a call centre doing contact tracing?”
He said the testing system set up in the pandemic had been understandably “stepped down” but added: “What you need is the ability very rapidly to put it back in place.”
Asked if he has concerns about the UK’s ability to step testing back up, Mr Hancock said: “That is what I’m concerned about. For instance, recently one of the major labs was put on the market. I think it would be better if it were mothballed and ready to go at the flick of a switch.”
Comments
Want to join the conversation? Please or to comment on this article.