Afternoon summary
- Mike Pompeo, the US secretary of state, has said the UK should join the US and countries around the world in being more assertive towards China. Speaking at a news conference, he praised Boris Johnson for his decision to exclude the Chinese firm Huawei from the UK’s 5G network, saying that the PM was making a decision in the national interest, and not just responding to pressure from Washington. Pompeo went on:
We think that the entire world needs to work together to ensure that every country - including China - behaves in the international system in ways that are appropriate and consistent with the international order.
You can’t go make claims for maritime regions that you have no lawful claim to. You can’t threaten countries and bully them in the Himalayas. You can’t engage in cover-ups and co-opt international institutions like the World Health Organization ...
We want every nation to work together to push back against the Chinese Communist party’s efforts in every dimension that I have described. That certainly includes the United Kingdom, it includes every country.
We hope we can build out a coalition that understands the threat and we’ll work collectively to convince the Chinese Communist party it’s not in their best interests to engage in this kind of behaviour.
- Prof Chris Whitty, the UK government’s chief medical adviser, has dismissed suggestions that ministers ignored scientific advice when they put off ordering a full lockdown until relatively late. In evidence to the Commons health select committee, Whitty said:
Ministers at the time, who were put in an incredibly difficult position, in my view, followed the advice given by Sage [the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies], which are clearly signposted through the minutes of Sage, with a delay that was no more than you would reasonably expect for what are really very difficult things to operationalise and decide.
I do not think - I’m not saying now and I’m not going to say at any point, to be clear - that in my view there was huge delay between the advice that ministers received, given the enormity of the difficulties that we were asking of people, and the practical implications of what was being done.
At a committee last week Sir Patrick Vallance, the government’s chief scientific adviser, suggested that ministers did delay following scientific advice to order a lockdown - although it has been reported that Vallance may have misremembered when Sage moved to recommending a full lockdown.
- Matt Hancock, the health secretary, has told MPs that Public Health England was not suited to setting up a national testing programme. Giving evidence to the Commons science committee, he said:
We need a standing capability, right, we need a public health agency that isn’t only brilliant at science, but also is ready to mass scale very, very quickly.
PHE was designed as a scientific organisation, and it is really good as a scientific organisation, and remains so, and has some of the best public health scientists in the world in PHE.
The challenge that it found was it was not set up to be an organisation ready to go to mass national scale and we didn’t go into this crisis with that mass of testing capability.
In that we were like almost every other country in the world. Germany was the exception in this space rather than the norm, and some of the far eastern countries.
Hancock also described his decision to set 100,000 tests a day as a target was a “big, hairy, audacious goal”. He explained:
I’ve been accused of over-promising and sometimes delivering.
And the point is that when you’re handling a pandemic response and the response you need is to scale-up at a speed that is almost unprecedented within government at a national scale, the tools that I found worked were to set demanding goals.
In fact the chancellor told me afterwards that I set a ‘big, hairy, audacious goal’, apparently this is a classic business school doctrine that I didn’t know that I was following.
- NHS chiefs have told the Welsh government the country is likely to need 5,000 extra beds on top of its normal capacity to deal with coronavirus this autumn and winter. As Steven Morris reports, at the government’s weekly press conference health minister Vaughan Gething said some field hospitals would be needed to meet the demand of what he believed would be “a truly extraordinary autumn and winter.”
- A Conservative MP’s behaviour has been branded “completely unacceptable” by his own party, following allegations over WhatsApp texts sent to a young female intern and a male parliament worker. As PA Media reports, Rob Roberts, MP for Delyn, North Wales, is under investigation by the office of the parliamentary commissioner for standards. CCHQ confirmed an investigation is under way, that Roberts has apologised and he is undergoing training in social media.
That’s all from me for today.
Coronavirus coverage continues on our global live blog. It’s here.
Updated
Here is my colleague Luke Harding’s analysis of what we’ve learnt from the ISC’s Russia report.
And here is an extract.
Four years on we still don’t know the extent of Russian meddling in the referendum. Nor did we discover if it affected the outcome. The Leave.EU campaign – funded by the Bristol businessman Arron Banks – claims the report exonerates their campaign, which included multiple meetings with the Russian ambassador in London. It doesn’t accuse or clear him; Banks makes a brief appearance in a footnote. The question of how deeply Moscow meddled cannot be answered because it was never asked, the ISC says. As the Scottish National party MP and ISC member Stewart Hosie said on Tuesday, nobody in government wished to go near the Russian meddling issue “with a 10ft barge pole” ...
Downing Street has said it will not do what the ISC wants. There will be no cross-Whitehall investigation of the EU referendum, it said after the report was released. This position is short-sighted: Putin is happy to support any political party if it suits his strategic purpose. In the absence of a Mueller-style inquiry, the debate over the legitimacy of the UK’s historic vote to leave the EU will rumble on. Neither side won a knockout blow on Tuesday. But the report fuels suspicion that the victorious Brexiters have something to hide, and will leave remainers feeling a little cheerier.
From the BBC’s security correspondent Frank Gardner
The UK’s Parliamentary ISC Intelligence & Security Cmtee has often been criticised in the past for being too soft on the Govt. Not today. The #RussiaReport shows a welcome independence and makes uncomfortable reading for some.
— Frank Gardner (@FrankRGardner) July 21, 2020
The Electoral Commission has said today’s ISC report on Russia strengthens for the case for it getting new powers to regulate elections. A spokesperson for the commission said:
To safeguard the UK’s elections from foreign interference, the commission continues to recommend that voters be given greater transparency over who is trying to influence them online by requiring all digital campaign materials to include an imprint; that approaches for enhanced due diligence and risk assessment should be adapted from money laundering regulations; and that rules should be introduced to ensure campaigners cannot accept money from companies that have not made enough money in the UK to fund their donation or loan.
As the independent body responsible for overseeing free and fair elections, we will continue to work closely with the UK’s governments to protect the integrity of the UK as a world leading democracy.
UK records 110 new coronavirus-related deaths
Turning back to coronavirus for a moment, the daily UK figure for the latest number of deaths has been published on the government’s dashboard. There have been 110 new deaths, it says, taking the total to 45,422.
This is a Public Health England figure for the UK as a whole. It gets published on the government’s website. But, confusingly, the Department of Health and Social Care has given up publishing this figure as part of its only daily update, because it no longer views it as reliable.
The PHE figure is suspect because it includes people in England who tested positive for coronavirus and died - even if they died of something else.
But the main problem with the headline total is that it is an under-estimate - because it does not include people who died from coronavirus without testing positive. When these deaths are included, total UK coronavirus deaths are more than 55,000.
Updated
Here is my colleague Marina Hyde on the ISC’s Russia report.
Eight ISC claims or recommendations rejected by the government
When parliamentary committees produce reports with recommendations, the government is obliged to publish a considered response, explaining whether or not the recommendations are being accepted. This can take months, and generally responses are a bit waffly. Because a recommendation is an implicit criticism, instead of saying “no”, governments prefer to say “not necessary, because we are already doing X, Y and Z”.
But today we got the official response (pdf) to the ISC report within an hour or so of it being published. And it was more blunt than these documents normally are. Here are eight claims or recommendations in the report that have been rejected by the government.
1 - The government has rejected the ISC’s call for an inquiry into Russian interference in the Brexit referendum. See 11.38am for the full quotes.
2 - The government has rejected claims it “badly underestimated” the threat from Russia. The committee said:
Until recently the government had badly underestimated the Russian threat and the response it required.
In response, the government said:
The government has long recognised there is an enduring and significant threat posed by Russia to the UK and its allies, including conventional military capabilities, disinformation, illicit finance, influence operations, and cyber-attacks. As such, Russia remains a top national security priority for the government.
3 - The government does not accept that responsibility for countering the threat from Russia is “unnecessarily complicated”. Referring to how responsibility is allocated, the committee said:
There are a number of unnecessarily complicated wiring diagrams that do not provide the clear lines of accountability that are needed.
But the government said:
There is a clear line of accountability for HMG’s policy on Russia: the Russia and Ukraine NSIG [national security implemention group] reports to the national security adviser and to ministers on the national security council. Ultimate ministerial oversight is provided by the prime minister.
4 - The government does not accept that MI5 needs to work more closely with the police on the threat from Russia. The committee said:
It is our view that while MI5 already works with the police regional counter-terrorism units (which have responsibility for hostile state activity) there is scope for them to work more closely together in this area.
But the government said:
MI5 has already developed closer working with police and Home Office partners in tackling the threat posed by hostile state activity, including working together closely on a number of hostile state activity cases.
It cited the response to the Salisbury novichok attack as a good example.
5 - The government rejected claims it needed better channels of communication with Russia. The committee said these were needed to “reduce the risk of miscommunication and escalation of hostilities”. The government said channels of communication were in place.
6 - The government refused to commit to giving the Electoral Commission more powers. The committee said:
We have already questioned whether the Electoral Commission has sufficient powers to ensure the security of democratic processes where hostile state threats are involved: if it is to tackle foreign interference then it must be given the necessary legislative powers.
But the government said:
The government notes the committee’s comments on the Electoral Commission and we continue to consider the recommendations from the Electoral Commission itself to enhance their powers. The commission has civil sanctioning powers that apply to referendums and elections. More serious criminal matters can and are referred to the police, and then considered by a court of law.
(Many Brexiters in government would rather abolish the Electoral Commission than give it extra powers. It is one of their least favourite government bodies, not least because of its investigation into Vote Leave.)
7 - The government refused to commit to toughening the Sanctions Act. The committee said:
The NCA also underlined that there are several ways in which the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018 is too restrictive. The NCA outlined changes they would wish to see to the legislation:
- including serious and organised crime as grounds for introducing sanctions; and
- providing for closed material proceedings to protect sensitive intelligence in the granting of, and any appeal against, sanctions (the special immigration appeals commission procedures offer a useful model for this).
But the government said the act already had “relevant provisions that would allow for sanctions in the interests of national security, in the interests of international peace and security and to further a foreign policy objective of the government”.
8 - The government rejected claims it had unreasonably delayed publication of the report. The ISC delivered the report to No 10 in time for it to be published before last year’s general election. In its news release the committee said that it was “a matter of great regret” that the report was not published in November, and at the press conference the Labour MP and committee member Kevan Jones said the excuses given by No 10 for the delay were untrue. (See 11.22am.) No 10 has denied this. (See 2.42pm.)
Updated
These are from the Labour peer Stewart Wood, who used to be a foreign affairs adviser to Gordon Brown when Brown was PM.
I was wrong to think the Government kept delaying publication of the #RussiaReport because it contained evidence of Russian interference. It seems it kept delaying publication because it contained evidence that the Government has done nothing to see if Russia interfered or not.
— Stewart Wood (@StewartWood) July 21, 2020
Lubov Chernukhin, wife of former Putin finance minister Vladimir Chernukhin, donated £325k to the Conservatives in the first quarter of 2020. Including £45k for a game of tennis with Boris Johnson (in 2014 the same match cost her £160k)
— Stewart Wood (@StewartWood) July 21, 2020
I’m sure she totally supports this refusal https://t.co/Wg5YiTyx4W
These are from the Lib Dem foreign affairs spokesman Alistair Carmichael on the ISC’s Russia report.
Today's watershed ISC #RussiaReport confirms an alarming truth: Conservative Governments past and present have failed to take the Russian threat to our democracy seriously, despite clear evidence they were already interfering to help Donald Trump to the presidency in 2016. /1
— Alistair Carmichael (@amcarmichaelMP) July 21, 2020
The first duty of government is to protect its citizens. The Conservatives have been asleep at their post in failing to conduct an assessment of interference in the EU referendum. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, especially when you don't look for the evidence. /2
— Alistair Carmichael (@amcarmichaelMP) July 21, 2020
Protecting our democracy should never come second to the Tories protecting their embarrassing links to Russian oligarchs before an election. Given what has come to light, Boris Johnson should think again about who he takes money from and gives influence to. /3
— Alistair Carmichael (@amcarmichaelMP) July 21, 2020
The Prime Minister must now announce a wide-ranging and properly funded investigation of potential Russian interference in our democracy, including the EU referendum and independence referendum. He must come to Parliament tomorrow and make clear what actions he will take. /ENDS
— Alistair Carmichael (@amcarmichaelMP) July 21, 2020
From Dominic Raab, the foreign secretary
Valuable discussion with @SecPompeo about shared priority issues, including the Middle East and the diversification of telecoms & the full range of bilateral issues. 🇬🇧 & 🇺🇸 do a tremendous amount together - we'll always work together to uphold security & prosperity of our people pic.twitter.com/FJ2RJ0j5fn
— Dominic Raab (@DominicRaab) July 21, 2020
Raab says the UK has not been strong-armed by the US. On Huawei, they have had constructive discussions, he says.
Pompeo says the PM’s decision was made on the basis of what was best for the United Kingdom.
Asked if the US has an “end state” for Huawei, he says it doesn’t. Its “end state” is to protect the data of US citizens, he says.
That information should not be in the hands of the Chinese Communist party, he says.
And that’s it. The press briefing is over.
Raab and Pompeo are taking questions now.
Q: Why did the government avoid investigating Russian interference in the referendum?
Raab says the government rejects this claim.
It does investigate what Russia is doing, he says. He says it is not for a second complacent about the threats posed by Russia in cyber.
Q: Do you want the UK to do more on China?
Pompeo says he does not see it like that.
The US wants all sovereign countries to understand the threat posed by China (or the CPC, the Chinese Communist party, as he puts it).
And it wants all nations to push back against China’s behaviour, he says.
Updated
Pompeo says he has had a “very productive” conversation with Raab.
He says the Chinese Communist party’s exploitation of the coronavirus crisis has been “disgraceful”.
He praises the UK for the Huawei ban, and for the decision to open its doors to Hongkongers.
The US supports “those sovereign choices”, he says.
He says he hopes the UK-US trade deal will be finalised “before too long”.
And he says they discussed extending the arms embargo on Iran.
The special relationship enabled him and Raab to have “candid, frank discussions”, he says.
Updated
Raab and Pompeo hold press briefing
Dominic Raab, the foreign secretary, and Mike Pompeo, the US secretary of state, are holding a press briefing now.
Raab starts by summing up the various topics covered in their discussion.
Updated
Turning back to coronavirus for a moment, here are the latest daily death figures.
NHS England has reported 15 new hospital deaths.
But there have been no further deaths in Scotland (details here), in Wales (details here) or in Northern Irelan (details here).
Here is some reaction to the ISC’s Russia report from two organisations campaigning for transparency in public life.
From Duncan Hames (the former Lib Dem MP), director of Policy at Transparency International UK:
This report confirms Britain’s ongoing role as a ‘laundromat’ for dirty money and reputations, and has major national security implications. Action needs to be taken urgently to root out illicit wealth and nefarious influence.
The National Crime Agency should be properly resourced with the funds and powers to counter the threat posed by powerful individuals with suspicious wealth and links to hostile states. Those in the private sector should fulfil their duty as the first line of defence against dirty money, with firm penalties for those that fail to do this.
From Will Moy, the chief executive of Full Fact, the factchecking website:
Misinformation and disinformation cause real harm to people’s lives, health, finances, and to our democracy.
Our dangerously out of date election laws have left our elections wide open to disinformation and abuse.
Other free countries have been preparing carefully to protect their elections from foreign and other interference and disinformation campaigns.
For example, the steps Canada has taken as part of its Protecting Democracy programme include: publishing the critical election incident public protocol explaining to citizens how a panel of named public servants will be responsible for warning the public of election interference attempts ...
The UK needs to follow Canada’s example and create a process for sharing warnings of election and referendum interference with the voters that is independent of the politicians who are campaigning for our votes.
Updated
At the Downing Street lobby briefing the prime minister’s spokesman rejected the claim from the Labour MP and ISC member Kevan Jones that No 10 had not told the truth about the reasons for the delay in the publication of today’s report. (See 10.35am.) These are from HuffPost’s Paul Waugh.
NEW. Asked if the PM felt that the 2016 Brexit referendum result was ‘fair’, his spokesman said: “Yes absolutely. We have seen no evidence of successful interference in the EU referendum.”
— Paul Waugh (@paulwaugh) July 21, 2020
The spokesman also rejected claims by ISC member Kevan Jones that No.10’s justifications for delays to be publication were “not true”. Jones said the government’s response should have been taken 10 days not nine months.
— Paul Waugh (@paulwaugh) July 21, 2020
“[In] the memorandum of understanding with the Committee...there is no set timetable for a response, nor is it set in legislation. The prime minister took the appropriate time to consider publication of a report which by definition relates to matters of national security.”
— Paul Waugh (@paulwaugh) July 21, 2020
Asked if the govt had actually looked to find any evidence, PM's spokesman replied: "Our intelligence and security agencies produce regular assessments of the threats posed by hostile states including potential interference in past or current UK democratic processes…" https://t.co/4Ttg0b7e8P
— Paul Waugh (@paulwaugh) July 21, 2020
"We haven’t seen any evidence of successful interference in the EU referendum.”
— Paul Waugh (@paulwaugh) July 21, 2020
And the FT’s Jim Pickard has more on that last claim. This is how the exchange went at lobby.
Number 10 spox: "We haven't seen any evidence of successful interference in EU referendum."
— Jim Pickard (@PickardJE) July 21, 2020
Journalist: "Nor have you looked for any. The whole point is nobody has looked. The question is why haven't you looked, then you can answer that question in a more convincing manner."
This is what Mike Pompeo, the US secretary of state, posted on Twitter after his meeting with Boris Johnson at No 10.
Constructive visit with @BorisJohnson today. Our two countries’ long-standing, strong bilateral relationship has laid the foundation for today’s candid discussion on issues ranging from 5G telecommunication to our negotiations for a U.S.-UK free trade agreement. pic.twitter.com/9j1o3bK8e6
— Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) July 21, 2020
The Downing Street readout from the talks said that Boris Johnson paid tribute to “the enduring strength of the UK-US special relationship” and that the two men discussed security technologies (ie, Huawei), China, Iran, the Middle East and a UK-US trade deal.
But it also says:
The prime minister reiterated the need for justice to be done for Harry Dunn and his family. He said there was a strong feeling among the people of the UK that justice must be delivered.
This may explain why Pompeo described the talks as “candid”. Washington is opposing calls for Anne Sacoolas to be forced to return to the UK to face court on charges of killing Harry Dunn in a road accident.
Here is my colleague Simon Murphy’s summary of the main points from the ISC’s Russia report.
Christopher Steele, the former MI6 agent and Russia specialist, gave evidence to the ISC as part of its Russia inquiry. He has now released the “strategic overview” he gave them. It’s here (pdf).
In his capacity as a Russia expert, Orbis Director Christopher Steele was invited to give evidence to the Russia inquiry. With the #RussiaReport out, we are (with ISC authorisation) releasing Steele’s strategic overview as presented to the committee.https://t.co/34Bee0EYp9
— Orbis Business Intelligence (@OrbisBIOfficial) July 21, 2020
Here is an extract.
My understanding, arising partly from personal experience with the Trump-Russia dossier, is that this government perhaps more than its predecessors is reluctant to see (or act upon) intelligence on Russian activities when this presents difficult wider political implications. Examples of this include reporting on the Kremlin’s likely hold over president Trump and his family/administration and indications of Russian interference in and clandestine funding of the Brexit referendum. In the case of the so-called ‘dossier’, this was initially handled appropriately by senior British intelligence professionals but, on reaching top political decision makers, a blanket appeared to be thrown over it and those who had produced or were associated with it. No enquiries were made or actions taken thereafter on the substance of the intelligence in the dossier by HMG. In this case, political considerations seemed to outweigh national security interests. If so, in my view, HMG made a serious mistake in balancing matters of strategic importance to our country. A prospective trade deal should never be allowed to eclipse considerations of national security.
The contents of Steele’s evidence was first revealed by my colleague Luke Harding in his newly published book, Shadow State: Murder, Mayhem and Russia’s Remaking of the West.
Updated
There will be an urgent question on the ISC report in the Commons tomorrow.
Two major UQs and a statement tomorrow from 12:30:
— Labour Whips (@labourwhips) July 21, 2020
1. @NickTorfaen to ask @pritipatel on the ISC Report into Russia.
2. @ThangamMP to ask @RobertJenrick on the implications of the end of the evictions ban for people renting their home.
3. Counter-Daesh update - @BWallaceMP
These are from Mark Urban, Newsnight’s diplomatic editor, on the ISC report.
The government must take political responsibility for the failure to address the Russian threats of subversion, electoral interference & espionage. But the ISC #RussiaReport is a real gut punch to MI5,MI6, & GCHQ. It paints a picture of complacency, self satisfaction, & drift
— Mark Urban (@MarkUrban01) July 21, 2020
That’s relevant to MI6 and GCHQ but even then isn’t the complete answer. Also, as members of the ISC have pointed out, MI5 is able to self task, could have moved this up the agenda
— Mark Urban (@MarkUrban01) July 21, 2020
This is from Julian Knight, the Conservative MP who chairs the Commons culture committee, on the ISC report.
That the intelligence and security committee has released its report on Russian interference on the day that we’re urging the government to get on with long promised legislation to protect against online harms piles on the evidence, should it be needed, that there can be no excuse for further delay.
The predecessor DCMS committee [see 12.12pm] repeatedly sought information from the government about the level of suspected Russian interference in politics and called for an independent investigation to uncover the impact of disinformation here in the UK and globally.
Moscow dismisses ISC report as 'Russophobia'
Russian officials have angrily protested the conclusions of the ISC’s Russia report, accusing the UK of taking a “leading role in Russophobia”. But they have also claimed it cleared Moscow of attempts to influence the 2016 Brexit referendum, echoing a talking point popular among Brexit backers in the UK who don’t want to see the results of the vote undermined.
“The charges are once again unfounded, unsubstantiated and unconvincing,” said Konstantin Kosachev, the head of the foreign affairs committee of Russia’s Federation Council, a lawmaking body, in written remarks on Tuesday.
Kosachev called the allegations that Russia had sought to infiltrate and influence British politics “dangerous” and compared them to “conspiracy theories ... sucked from one’s fingers”.
Kosachev also claimed that the report had “lifted the suspicion on Russia for Brexit,” although the long-delayed document had said that the British government had failed to prepare or conduct any proper assessment of Kremlin attempts to interfere with the 2016 Brexit referendum.
Russia’s foreign ministry also attacked the report shortly after its release. Maria Zakharova, a spokeswoman for the foreign ministry, said: “It was no sensation.” She also called the report “Russophobia”.
Updated
Asked if she agreed with calls for a full inquiry in the contents of the report, Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister, told reporters at her briefing “that’s not for me to launch, it’s for the UK government”, pointing out that intelligence and security were reserved matters. But she said she had “no objection” to a further investigation.
Asked whether she believed that there had been Russian interference in the independence referendum, she said:
I only know what I’ve read in the report this morning which is about three lines and footnote which seems to suggest that evidence the committee was able to source wasn’t UK intelligence or security information, so I don’t know that. But the UK government should be taking greater steps to find out, whether it’s about [the independence referendum] or the Brexit vote where the report seems to be very explicit that they haven’t even bothered to look into that.
This is a report that has been kept hidden from the public for months. Now that it’s out there the questions that should be asked are for the UK government.
We should not be complacent about the prospect of Russian interference and the issue here is that the UK government which bears responsibility for these matters has been complacent in the past and hopefully that’s an attitude we will see change.
Summary of ISC's Russia report
Here is the 55-page ISC report on Russia (pdf). Here is the committee’s summary.
And here are some of the main points.
- The ISC says until recently the UK has underestimated the threat from Russia. It says:
It has been clear for some time that Russia under Putin has moved from potential partner to established threat, fundamentally unwilling to adhere to international law – the murder of Alexander Litvinenko in 2006 and the annexation of Crimea in 2014 were stark indicators of this.
We therefore question whether the government took its eye off the ball because of its focus on counter-terrorism: it was the opinion of the committee that until recently the government had badly underestimated the response required to the Russian threat – and is still playing catch-up.
Russia poses a tough intelligence challenge and our intelligence agencies must have the tools they need to tackle it.
- It criticises the government for not investigating allegations that Russia intervened in the Brexit referendum. It says:
There have been widespread public allegations that Russia sought to influence the 2016 referendum on the UK’s membership of the EU. The impact of any such attempts would be difficult – if not impossible – to assess, and we have not sought to do so.
However, it is important to establish whether a hostile state took deliberate action with the aim of influencing a UK democratic process, irrespective of whether it was successful or not.
See 10.54am for more on this.
- It says that the intelligence agencies were reluctant to supply information to the committee about Russian involvement in Brexit. It says:
In response to our request for written evidence at the outset of the inquiry, MI5 initially provided just six lines of text.
The brevity was also, to us, again, indicative of the extreme caution amongst the intelligence and security agencies at the thought that they might have any role in relation to the UK’s democratic processes, and particularly one as contentious as the EU referendum.
We repeat that this attitude is illogical; this is about the protection of the process and mechanism from hostile state interference, which should fall to our intelligence and security agencies.
- It says the UK should “name and shame” Russia if it is found to be responsible for hacking or other cyber-attack attempts. It says:
When attacks can be traced back – and we accept that this is in itself resource-intensive – the government must always consider ‘naming and shaming’.
Whilst the UK must have its own defensive and offensive capabilities, it must also be prepared to lead international action.
In terms of attribution, it is apparent that not everyone is keen to adopt this new approach and to ‘call out’ Russia on malicious cyber-activity.
The government must now leverage its diplomatic relationships to develop a common international approach when it comes to the attribution of malicious cyber-activity by Russia and others.
- It says new laws are needed to counter foreign spying. It says:
New legislation must be introduced to tackle foreign spies: the Official Secrets Act is not fit for purpose and while this goes unrectified the UK intelligence community’s hands are tied.
More broadly, we need a continuing international consensus against Russian aggressive action.
- It says Russians with “very close links” to Vladimir Putin are “well integrated into the UK business, political and social scene”. It says:
Russian influence in the UK is ‘the new normal’, and there are a lot of Russians with very close links to Putin who are well integrated into the UK business and social scene, and accepted because of their wealth.
This level of integration – in ‘Londongrad’ in particular – means that any measures now being taken by the government are not preventative but rather constitute damage limitation.
- It says transparency in the House of Lords should be increased to determine if there is Russian influence on peers. It says:
Several members of the Russian elite who are closely linked to Putin are identified as being involved with charitable and/or political organisations in the UK, having donated to political parties, with a public profile which positions them to assist Russian influence operations.
It is notable that a number of members of the House of Lords have business interests linked to Russia, or work directly for major Russian companies linked to the Russian state – these relationships should be carefully scrutinised, given the potential for the Russian state to exploit them.
It is important that the code of conduct for members of the House of Lords, and the register of Lords’ interests, including financial interests, provide the necessary transparency and are enforced.
In this respect, we note that the code of conduct for members of parliament requires that MPs register individual payments of more than £100 which they receive for any employment outside the house – this does not apply to the House of Lords, and consideration should be given to introducing such a requirement.
“A ‘Foreign Agents Registration Act’ (an issue which is addressed in the section on legislation) would also be helpful in this respect.
- It says the UK’s investor visa scheme has been abused by Russians. It says:
What is now clear is that it [the investor policy] was in fact counter-productive, in that it offered ideal mechanisms by which illicit finance could be recycled through what has been referred to as the London ‘laundromat’.
The money was also invested in extending patronage and building influence across a wide sphere of the British establishment – PR firms, charities, political interests, academia and cultural institutions were all willing beneficiaries of Russian money, contributing to a ‘reputation laundering’ process.
Updated
At her lunchtime briefing Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister, said that, from an initial reading of the ISC report, the UK government seemed to be guilty of negligence. She said:
I do think the main message would be negligence on the part of the UK government in the face of Russian interference ...
I would say first that we should not be at any point complacent at the possibility of Russian interference in our democratic processes.
She added that she did not think it was possible to draw any conclusions from the few lines in the report that referenced the Scottish independence referendum and its aftermath. (See 11.45am.)
Updated
Sir Ed Davey, the acting Lib Dem leader, has accused Boris Johnson of “sticking his head in the sand” on the issue of Russian interference in UK politics. In a statement Davey said:
Boris Johnson refusing to launch an inquiry into Russian election interference is a green light for them to do it in the future. The government have been told by a cross-party group of MPs that we must establish what role Russian interference played in the Brexit referendum in order to protect our democratic process, but still refuse to pursue it.
You cannot hope to deal with interference if you do not even check if it is happening. Rather than sticking his head in the sand, Boris Johnson must ask the intelligence community to launch a wide-ranging and properly funded investigation so that we can understand just what influence Russian interference had on our democracy.
And these are from the businessman Bill Browder on the ISC report. Browder has been a prominent campaigner against Russian corruption following the death of the Russian lawyer working on his behalf, Sergei Magnitsky, following his mistreatment by the Russian authorities.
My initial take on Russia report: This is a strong report. The ISC recognizes the whole Russian enabler problem in London-lawyers, accountants and consultants getting rich off dirty Russians and refers to link between Russian state and organized crime https://t.co/7YH2D3FiPo
— Bill Browder (@Billbrowder) July 21, 2020
The ISC makes good recommendations: 1) Strengthening the NCA to investigate dirty Russian money in the UK, 2) Creating a UK Foreign Agent Registration Act, so there would be transparency in Russian lobbying, 3) Using targeted Magnitsky sanctions against crooked Russian officials
— Bill Browder (@Billbrowder) July 21, 2020
And this is from Guy Verhofstadt, the MEP and former Belgian PM who was the European parliament’s lead spokesman on Brexit.
Brexit was always a gift to Putin because it weakened the European Union & left Britain divided, isolated. The #RussiaReport shows just how many questions remain unanswered.https://t.co/Xob9uYn3w6
— Guy Verhofstadt (@guyverhofstadt) July 21, 2020
Nigel Farage, who was Ukip leader at the time of the Brexit referendum, claims that he has been vindicated by the ISC report.
Years of lies and smears from Remain politicians and much of our media.
— Nigel Farage (@Nigel_Farage) July 21, 2020
There is no evidence of Russian involvement with https://t.co/mfzcCr9wJQ or me in the referendum.
It was all a hoax — apologies are now required.
This is from Lisa Nandy, the shadow foreign secretary, on the ISC Russia report.
It is extraordinary that the prime minister, Boris Johnson, took the political decision last October ahead of the general election to block the publication of this important report that systematically goes through the threat Russia poses to the UK’s national security.
The report is very clear that the government has under-estimated the response required to Russia and it is imperative we learn the lessons from the mistakes that have been made.
This is from Damian Collins, the Conservative MP and a former chair of the Commons culture committee.
I'm pleased the Intelligence and Security committee's #RussiaReport agrees with key recommendations made in the 2018/19 @CommonsDCMS reports on disinformation about the need for proper laws & regulations to safeguard democracy from foreign interference campaigns on social media pic.twitter.com/F8qkSAwtFg
— Damian Collins (@DamianCollins) July 21, 2020
Julian Lewis, the ISC chair, is wrapping up the press conference now.
He says the committee has been subjected to “unprecedented delay and dislocation”. That must never happen again, he says. The sooner normal relations with government are resumed, the better, he says.
But he says the government’s decision to make a written statement this morning (presumably its reply to the committee - see 11.38am), without giving the committee advance notice of what was in it, did not help.
Updated
Q: Do you think the government has been reluctant to investigate Russian interference in the Brexit referendum because it is run by the side that won?
Stewart Hosie says the report is not saying that. It is just saying that the government did not investigate this, when it should have done, and that it should hold an inquiry now.
Kevan Jones says it is not for the committee to take a view on that. If others want to, that’s up to them.
He says democracy is a precious thing. We need to do what we can to protect it. And that was not done. It should be, because we are dealing with an adversary that will not go away soon, he says.
Updated
Q: Do the committee’s findings back claims that Russia wants to break up the UK (because of its interference in the Scottish independence referendum)?
Stewart Hosie says after the 2014 referendum the Russian media did try to discredit the result (ie, fuelling claims that it was rigged against the pro-independence campaign). He says the conclusion was that this was primarily to discredit the UK in the eyes of a Russian audience.
But that should have been enough to persuade the government to take Russian interference more seriously, he says.
This is what the report says on this in paragraph 41.
There has been credible open source commentary suggesting that Russia undertook influence campaigns in relation to the Scottish independence referendum in 2014. However, at the time ***. It appears that *** what some commentators have described as potentially the first post-Soviet Russian interference in a western democratic process. We note that – almost five years on – ***
And this is what it says in a footnote to the paragraph.
For example, it was widely reported shortly after the referendum that Russian election observers had suggested that there were irregularities in the conduct of the vote, and this position was widely pushed by Russian state media. We understand that HMG viewed this as being primarily aimed at discrediting the UK in the eyes of a domestic Russian audience. More recently, we note the study by Ben Nimmo – #ElectionWatch: Scottish Vote, Pro-Kremlin Trolls, 12 December 2017.
Updated
Government rejects ISC's call for inquiry into Russian interference in Brexit referendum
Dominic Raab, the foreign secretary, has published the government’s response to the ISC report. It runs to 20 pages and it’s here (pdf).
We’ve been clear that Russia must desist from its attacks on the UK & our allies. We will be resolute in defending our country, our democracy & our values from such Hostile State Activity. See the Government’s full response to the ISC Russia report here 👇 https://t.co/KeMklHFowa
— Dominic Raab (@DominicRaab) July 21, 2020
In it, the government rejects the call for a new inquiry into Russian interference in the Brexit referendum.
Here is the recommendation from the ISC.
[Paragraph 47] …Whilst the issues at stake in the EU referendum campaign are less clear-cut, it is nonetheless the committee’s view that the UK intelligence and security community should produce an analogous assessment of potential Russian interference in the EU referendum and that an unclassified summary of it be published.
And here is the government’s response.
We have seen no evidence of successful interference in the EU referendum.
The intelligence and security agencies produce and contribute to regular assessments of the threat posed by hostile state activity, including around potential interference in UK democratic processes. We keep such assessments under review and, where necessary, update them in response to new intelligence, including during democratic events such as elections and referendums. Where new information emerges, the government will always consider the most appropriate use of any intelligence it develops or receives, including whether it is appropriate to make this public. Given this long standing approach, a retrospective assessment of the EU referendum is not necessary.
Updated
Q: What do you think Russia seeks to gain from interfering in British politics? And is there any reason why they would not have interfered in the Brexit referendum?
Kevan Jones says a lot of this is already known. The Russians were keen to amplify divisions, he says.
Q: Should the intelligence agencies have launched their own investigation anyway?
Kevan Jones says there is a “genuine nervousness” in the intelligence agencies about getting involved in politics. It was for ministers to order an inquiry. And the evidence was there to justify one, he says.
Q: So who is to blame? Are you talking about the Cameron government? The May government, and its foreign secretary, Boris Johnson? Or all of them?
Stewart Hosie says people talk about a whole-of-government approach. But national security should be a cabinet decision, he says.
Kevan Jones says the government has spent the past week trying to discredit the report, implying its conclusions are out of date. They are not, he says.
And he repeats his point about how the reasons being given by No 10 for the report being delayed are just “not true”.
He says he has been “saddened” by this. The ISC does a serious job, he says. It is an important part of democracy. The way it has been treated by the government does not help, he says.
Stewart Hosie says any lessons that could have been learned will now be learned later, perhaps too late to stop future cyber-attacks.
He says the system for protecting the UK from cyber-attacks is too complicated.
Updated
Q: What should the government be doing now to rectify this?
Hosie says the first step would be to investigate thoroughly whether there has been Russian interference.
The House of Lords needs a revamp, he says.
And he says the Official Secrets Act needs to be revised. At the moment it is not illegal to spy in the UK, he says. That should be changed, he says.
Q: Is there any evidence of criminal activity by MPs or peers taking money from Russians?
Stewart Hosie says he won’t comment on allegations about criminality.
But in the Commons any earnings over £100 have to be declared. That is not the case in the House of Lords, he says.
He says that rule should be changed, so that peers and MPs are in the same situation.
Kevan Jones says some names were given to the committee. But he does not want to comment on any people not named in the open report.
Q: Why do you think that the government does not want to investigate this?
Stewart Hosie says it is not because the intelligence agencies cannot do the job.
Journalists need to ask the government, he says.
He says it is hard to know why they would not want to act to protect the integrity of the electoral process.
Q: [From my colleague Luke Harding] Did the committee investigate links between Aaron Banks (the Leave.EU campaigner) and the Russian embassy. Banks says he has been exonerated by the report. Is that right?
Kevan Jones says page 13, footnote 50 covers this.
This is what that footnote says.
We note that Arron Banks became the biggest donor in British political history when he gave £8m to the Leave.EU campaign. In October 2018, the Electoral Commission – which had been investigating the source of this donation – referred the case to the National Crime Agency, which investigated it ***. In September 2019, the National Crime Agency announced that it had concluded the investigation, having found no evidence that any criminal offences had been committed under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 or company law by any of the individuals or organisations referred to it by the Electoral Commission. 51 ***
At the press conference Kevan Jones and Stewart Hosie have been speaking more, in the Q&A, about Russian interference in the Brexit referendum. They say that solid evidence for such interference is not there. But that is because the government never asked the intelligence services to investigate, they say.
Updated
This is what the press release from the committee says about the Brexit referendum. (These are the points Stewart Hosie was summarising a few minutes ago - see 10.46am.) The ISC says:
There have been widespread allegations that Russia sought to influence voters in the 2016 referendum on the UK’s membership of the EU: studies have pointed to the preponderance of pro-Brexit or anti-EU stories on RT and Sputnik, and the use of ‘bots’ and ‘trolls’, as evidence.
The actual impact of such attempts on the result itself would be difficult – if not impossible – to prove. However what is clear is that the government was slow to recognise the existence of the threat – only understanding it after the ‘hack and leak’ operation against the Democratic National Committee, when it should have been seen as early as 2014.
As a result the government did not take action to protect the UK’s process in 2016. The committee has not been provided with any post-referendum assessment – in stark contrast to the US response to reports of interference in the 2016 presidential election. In our view there must be an analogous assessment of Russian interference in the EU referendum.
Updated
ISC criticises ministers for ignoring possible Russian interference in Brexit and demands government inquiry
At the press conference Stewart Hosie says Russia did reportedly try to influence the Brexit referendum. He says it is impossible to tell how influential it was. But he says what was really striking was the government’s refusal to even consider what impact this might have had. He says the government “actively avoided” trying to address this issue.
He says it is “astonishing” that the the government did not consider in advance what might be done to protect the integrity of the electoral process.
He says the committee is saying this should be investigated now. The government should assess what impact Russian interference had. And the public should be told, he says.
UPDATE: Hosie said:
There has been no assessment of Russian interference in the EU referendum and this goes back to nobody wanting to touch the issue with a 10-foot pole.
This is in stark contrast to the US response to reported interference in the 2016 presidential election.
There should have been an assessment of Russian interference in the EU referendum and there must now be one, and the public must be told the results of that assessment.
Updated
Here is the summary of the report produced by the ISC itself.
Intelligence and security committee questions whether government took its eye off the ball on Russia, finds that they underestimated the response required to the Russian threat and are still playing catch up.
Russian influence in the UK is the new normal. Successive governments have welcomed the oligarchs and their money with open arms, providing them with a means of recycling illicit finance through the London ‘laundromat’, and connections at the highest levels with access to UK companies and political figures.
This has led to a growth industry of ‘enablers’ including lawyers, accountants, and estate agents who are – wittingly or unwittingly – de facto agents of the Russian state.
It clearly demonstrates the inherent tension between the government’s prosperity agenda and the need to protect national security. While we cannot now shut the stable door, greater powers and transparency are needed urgently.
UK is clearly a target for Russian disinformation. While the mechanics of our paper-based voting system are largely sound, we cannot be complacent about a hostile state taking deliberate action with the aim of influencing our democratic processes.
Yet the defence of those democratic processes has appeared something of a ‘hot potato’, with no one organisation considering itself to be in the lead, or apparently willing to conduct an assessment of such interference. This must change.
Social media companies must take action and remove covert hostile state material: government must ‘name and shame’ those who fail to act.
We need other countries to step up with the UK and attach a cost to Putin’s actions. Salisbury must not be allowed to become the high water mark in international unity over the Russia threat.
A number of issues addressed in this published version of the Russia report are covered in more depth in the classified annex. We are not able to discuss these aspects on the grounds of national security.
Updated
Here is the 55-page Russia report (pdf).
And here is the ISC press release about it.
Russia report reveals UK government failed to address Kremlin interference
Here is my colleague Dan Sabbagh’s story about the report. He and other reporters were allowed to see it in advance before the embargo was lifted.
And this is how Dan’s story starts.
British government and British intelligence failed to prepare or conduct any proper assessment of Kremlin attempts to interfere with the 2016 Brexit referendum, according to the long-delayed Russia report.
The damning conclusion is contained within the 50-page document from parliament’s intelligence and security committee, which said ministers “had not seen or sought evidence of successful interference in UK democratic processes”.
The committee, which scrutinises the work of Britain’s spy agencies, said: “We have not been provided with any post-referendum assessment of Russian attempts at interference” – and contrasted the response with that of the US.
“This situation is in stark contrast to the US handling of allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, where an intelligence community assessment was produced within two months of the vote, with an unclassified summary being made public.”
Reasons given by Boris Johnson for delaying publication were not true, says Labour ISC member
Kevan Jones, the Labour MP, is starting.
He says the report had to be sent to the PM before publication. It was sent to Boris Johnson last year, but he delayed publication, so it could not be published before the election.
Jones says No 10 said it did not have time to vet the report. That was “not true”, he says. He says various claims made by No 10 about the delay were not true.
Updated
ISC holds press conference on Russia report
Julian Lewis, the chair of the ISC, is opening the press conference now.
He says he will not be discussing the report, because he was not on the committee when it wrote the report. But he says two MPs who were on the committee then, Kevan Jones (Lab) and Stewart Hosie (SNP), will discuss it.
Intelligence and security committee set to publish Russia report
At 10.30am the intelligence and security committee is going to publish its long-awaited report into Russian interference in British politics. The report was sent to Downing Street in October last year, in time for publication before the general election, but Boris Johnson dragged his feet when it came to approving it for publication, fuelling suspicions that he was suppressing it because it contained embarrassing revelations about Russian donations to the Conservative party, and President Vladimir Putin’s support for the Brexit campaign in the 2016 referendum. Johnson dismissed these claims, saying that when the report was eventually published the conspiracy theorists would be disappointed. Some of the claims were “Bermuda Triangle stuff”, he argued.
The report should be available at 10.30am on the ISC’s website.
Following publication Julian Lewis, the committee’s chair, will hold a press conference.
Here is my colleague Dan Sabbagh’s preview story.
Updated
Commenting on the borrowing figures this morning (see 8.12am) Rishi Sunak, the chancellor, said that over time he would put the public finances back on a sustainable footing. He said:
It’s clear that coronavirus has had a significant impact on our public finances, but we know without our response things would have been far worse.
The best approach to ensure our public finances are sustainable in the medium term is to minimise the economic scarring caused by the pandemic.
Our plan for jobs does this by providing significant and targeted support where it’s needed the most, to ensure nobody is left without hope as we reopen our economy.
I am also clear that, over the medium term, we must, and we will, put our public finances back on a sustainable footing.
Updated
Anneliese Dodds, the shadow chancellor, says the above-inflation pay increase for some public sector workers announced overnight will not make up for the real-terms pay cuts they faced over the last decade.
The Tories froze public sector pay for seven long years. A pay rise now won’t make up for a decade of real terms pay cuts for many frontline workers.
— Anneliese Dodds (@AnnelieseDodds) July 21, 2020
Others won't get a penny more as Tory promises to maintain local authority funding haven’t materialised. That’s not good enough.
Here is my colleague Peter Walker’s story on the pay increase.
Coronavirus deaths in England and Wales at lowest level for four months, says ONS
The Office for National Statistics has published its latest weekly death figures for England and Wales. Here are the key points.
- The number of coronavirus deaths in England and Wales in the week ending Friday 10 July was, at 366, at its lowest level for four months. Coronavirus deaths were 31.2% down on the previous week, and accounted for just 4.2% of all deaths in England and Wales.
- Overall deaths in England and Wales in the week ending 10 July were below the five-year average (by 6.1%) for the fourth week in a row. That means there were no excess deaths.
The east of England was the only region where deaths were still above the five-year average.
Agenda for the day
Good morning. I’m Andrew Sparrow, taking over from Alexandra Topping.
Here is the agenda for the day.
9.30am: The ONS publishes its weekly coronavirus death figures for England and Wales.
10am: Boris Johnson chairs the first in-person cabinet meeting since the lockdown started. Ministers are meeting in a large room in the Foreign Office, to allow social distancing.
10.30am: The intelligence and security committee publishes its long-awaited report on Russian interference in British politics. Julian Lewis, the committee’s chair, is holding a press conference about it.
10.30am: Prof Chris Whitty, the chief medical officer for England, and his two deputies, Prof Jonathan Van-Tam and Dr Jenny Harries, give evidence to the Commons health committee.
12pm: Johnson meets Mike Pompeo, the US secretary of state, in Downing Street.
12.15pm: Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister, holds a coronavirus briefing.
12.30pm: Mark Drakeford, the Welsh first minister, holds a coronavirus briefing.
2.30pm: Suella Braverman, the attorney general, gives evidence to the Commons justice committee.
2.30pm: Matt Hancock, the health and social care secretary, gives evidence to the Commons science committee.
3pm: Pompeo is due to hold a press conference with Dominic Raab, the foreign secretary.
Updated
Kit Malthouse has also been speaking on BBC Breakfast, where he said shops should encourage people to wear face masks when they become compulsory.
There’s no intention for the police to be standing outside every branch of Asda or Greggs and making sure that people are wearing face masks.
What we’re doing is adopting the same posture that we did throughout the lockdown which is encourage people to comply.
We know from the previous experience that the vast majority of people will, and that, you know, shops and others should encourage people to wear face masks if at all possible, and they obviously are - it’s going to be compulsory.
But if people resist or won’t leave the premises or there’s any kind of altercation, then obviously the police will be called and they should attend if it’s a public order issue, as they would in any other retail circumstance - if there was a scuffle or a conflict that arose.
Updated
The government is coming under fire this morning for the decision not to give care workers a pay rise, after it announced a pay increase for almost a million public sector workers.
The policing minister Kit Malthouse told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that social care workers would have to rely on increases in the minimum wage to improve their pay.
Malthouse said:
The vast majority of social care workers are paid in the private sector so our ability to influence pay rates there is limited.
He said that apart from “nationalising the entire thing”, the minimum wage rate was the best tool the government had to recognise the efforts of care workers.
Everybody looks at people who work in social care during coronavirus and thinks they have done a fantastic job in very, very difficult circumstances.
But [the minimum wage increase is] the mechanism by which we think we can increase pay in that sector.
Malthouse denied that the chief nursing officer, Ruth May, had been silenced by No 10. She was dropped from a Downing Street press conference in the wake of the Dominic Cummings row after saying that lockdown rules should apply to all.
He said:
The prime minister and ministers are responsible for the decisions that have been taken and the science is meant to inform their decisions.
Who or who doesn’t appear at a podium at a particular press conference seems to me less relevant than this hard-working and dedicated public servant can speak when she wishes and she has done, obviously, before and since.
I don’t think there’s any intention to restrict that.
Updated
Government borrowing hit £35.5bn in June
The Office for National Statistics (ONS) has estimated that government borrowing has rocketed to £35.5bn in June – around a five-fold increase year-on-year.
The June figure is the third highest for any month on record and meant borrowing in the first quarter of the financial year was more than double that seen in the whole of the previous year.
Despite this, borrowing in June was lower than the £45bn pencilled in by most economists and less than the revised £45.5bn recorded for May - so, reasons to be cheerful.
Updated
Reasonable to assume some vaccine doses could be available before Christmas, says deputy CMO
The deputy chief medical officer for England Prof Jonathan Van-Tam has written in the Sun about news of a potential coronavirus vaccine (link here).
He wrote:
It is a great day for British science. It does really show that we’re global leaders in this area.
Normally, it takes 10 years to develop a vaccine from start to finish, to the point where you can give it widespread to patients.
And you can see with the Oxford announcement just how fast we’re moving on this.
It doesn’t mean that we’re going to ultimately be successful. Right now the range of possibilities is from very early success through to we never get a vaccine against Covid-19.
What we’ve got with the Oxford result is clear proof that that vaccine produces a really good immune response in humans.
It is very encouraging indeed. I’m now cautiously optimistic that this vaccine may work.
Van-Tam said 100m doses of future supply of the Oxford vaccine had been secured, adding that the success rate of a reasonable vaccine concept was 10%. That meant there needed to be “multiple shots on goal”, he said.
We are expecting to host five or six big vaccine trials in the UK in the autumn and yesterday we launched a website to allow the public to register their interest to take part in the trial.
We are hoping to have 10,000 people per trial, so up to 60,000 participants. We’re not looking just for 20-year-olds, but people from a range of backgrounds and co-morbidities.
He added:
My best estimates are that if this continues to run with the success that we have had so far, it would not be unreasonable to think that we will be getting some doses of that vaccine this side of Christmas.
[...]
I’m a glass-half-full man. I’m cautiously optimistic that by late spring next year there will be several vaccines that will have made it.
My confidence is increasing week by week with the news that comes through.
Updated
Cabinet to meet in person for first time in four months
Boris Johnson will gather his cabinet in person for the first time in four months today as the government presses ahead with plans to secure millions of doses of a potential Covid-19 vaccine. PA Media reports:
Senior ministers will meet in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office rather than the smaller cabinet room in Downing Street to allow for proper social distancing.
It comes after a study suggested a Covid-19 vaccine being developed by the University of Oxford was safe and induces an immune reaction, which was branded “encouraging” by the scientific community.
Tuesday’s cabinet meeting – the first in person since 17 March – also comes after the government signed deals for 90m doses of other promising Covid-19 vaccines.
This latest deal was made with a pharmaceutical giant alliance between the firms BioNtech and Pfizer as well as Valneva.
The government is aiming to build a portfolio of potential vaccines, alongside effective treatments for coronavirus.
The latest announcement is for 30m doses of a vaccine from BioNTech/Pfizer, 60m doses from Valneva, with an option to acquire a further 40m doses if needed. It follows an agreement for 100m doses of the Oxford vaccine.
Updated
Almost 900,000 public sector workers to get pay rise
Good morning and welcome to the Guardian’s UK coronavirus live blog, I’m Alexandra Topping and I’ll be with you this morning.
Here is a quick round up of this morning’s top stories.
- Almost 900,000 public sector workers will be given an above-inflation pay rise on Tuesday, the chancellor has announced. Teachers and doctors will receive the largest increases, at 3.1% and 2.8% respectively, according to the Treasury. Police, prison officers and National Crime Agency staff will be given a 2.5% rise in pay and members of the armed forces will receive a 2% uplift. Members of the judiciary and senior civil servants will also have their pay topped up by 2%.
- British households have suffered the biggest hit to their finances since the oil crisis of the mid-1970s as the coronavirus pandemic threatens to inflict severe financial hardship across the country. Against a backdrop of rising job losses four months into the crisis, the Resolution Foundation thinktank said the average household in Britain had suffered a 4.5% drop in income in the month of May, compared with their average monthly income level in the financial year ending March 2020, before the crisis struck.
- Face masks should be compulsory in GP surgeries to minimise the spread of Covid-19, according to one of the top representative bodies for doctors. The British Medical Association said that compelling people to cover their face while in shops or on public transport but not in a GP practice is “illogical” and “makes no sense”. It wants the government to change the law to make it mandatory, as they have already done – after disagreements between ministers over their approach – for those in other settings.
- Hopes for a vaccine to address the global spread of coronavirus have been raised after Oxford University’s experimental version was revealed to be safe and to generate a strong immune response in the people who volunteered to help trial it. After intensive research, Prof Sarah Gilbert, from Oxford’s Jenner Institute, said they were more than happy with the first results, which showed good immunity after a single dose of vaccine.
- Trials of an experimental drug inhaled by patients have found a significant reduction in hospital patients with Covid-19 needing to be put on a ventilator or dying from the disease, according to researchers. The drug, called SNG001, is delivered via an inhaler and is based on interferon beta, a protein produced naturally in the body that plays an important role in coordinating the body’s antiviral response.
- About 3,500 people in England may die within the next five years of one of the four main cancers – breast, lung, oesophageal or bowel – as a result of delays in being diagnosed because of Covid-19, research shows. Many of these will be young or middle-aged people, say the researchers in the Lancet Oncology journal.
If you think we’ve missed a story or want to draw my attention to something - please do get in touch! I’m on alexandra.topping@theguardian.com or I am @lexytopping on Twitter and my DMs are open.
Updated
