Afternoon summary
- Ministers won a vote on the 10pm compulsory pub closing time, but dozens of MPs voted against. The result has just been announced, and the regulations were passed by 299 votes to 82. Labour were abstaining and, with the government at no risk of losing, many Conservatives were using the vote to register their disapproval, A full breakdown of the vote, showing the exact number of Tory rebels, will be available later.
- Chris Green, the Conservative MP for Bolton West, has resigned as a parliamentary private secretary because he is opposed to the government’s coronavirus restrictions. In a letter to the PM he says restrictions in Bolton have driven many businesses “to the brink of collapse” and that he now thinks “the attempted cure is worse than the disease”.
The Bolton lockdown has clearly not worked, and I believe that the cure is worse than the disease, so I have stepped down from my role as Parliamentary Private Secretary. pic.twitter.com/HdEm4hw8Rh
— Chris Green (@CGreenUK) October 13, 2020
That’s all from me for tonight. But our coverage continues on our global coronavirus live blog. It’s here.
Voters back short 'circuit breaker' lockdown by two to one, YouGov poll suggests
Conventional wisdom would have it that that proposing to close all pubs and restaurants for two or three weeks, banning household mixing and shutting non-essential offices would not be popular, but one of the perhaps surprising features of Covid has been that the public has regularly backed more restrictive policies rather than more liberal policies, at least according to the polls. Sir Keir Starmer’s initiative this afternoon may have sounded bold, but it was not electorally risky.
According to a YouGov snap poll released today, voters say by a margin of two to one that the government should have followed Sage’s recommendation and opted for a three-week national lockdown in September.
Two days ago a separate Ipsos Mori poll found 73% of respondents backing local lockdowns where Covid cases are rising. Only 13% were opposed.
Updated
Q: Have you discussed this with leaders in Greater Manchester? They are opposed to plans like this.
Starmer says he has consulted extensively with local government and local mayors, on a regular basis. He says he knows how strongly Andy Burnham feels about this. The government is trying to blame anyone but themselves, he says.
The government asked a lot of people during the lockdown. People gave a lot. But the government did not deliver its side of the bargain, he says.
And that’s it. The press conference is over.
Q: You dodged the question from Robert Peston about how much this would cost. Is that because you don’t know?
Starmer says he is just proposing something for two or three weeks. That would be better than measures that would last for months.
Updated
Q: Some local leaders, like Andy Burnham, have resisted going into tier 3. Do they have some responsibility?
No, says Starmer. He says it’s the government that is responsible.
He says people like Burnham have been calling for more responsibility, over things like test and trace. But they have not been given it.
Updated
The dial-in phase of the press conference is starting now.
Q: Are you confident Labour MPs will support this? Some of them are quite sceptical about tier 3 restrictions?
Sir Keir Starmer says there is a consensus among Labour MPs that the virus is out of control. MPs support further measures.
Q: Why do you think the economic impact of this would be less than what the PM is doing?
Starmer accepts that a balance has to be struck. But Boris Johnson’s approach is not balanced.
The prolonged agony of Johnson’s approach would be worse than the pain of a circuit break, he says.
Starmer's plan for two/three-week 'circuit break' lockdown
Here is the passage from Sir Keir Starmer’s statement where he explained what he was proposing.
I am calling for a two-to-three week circuit break in England in line with Sage’s recommendation.
A temporary set of clear and effective restrictions designed to get the R rate down and reverse the trend of infections and hospital admissions.
This would not mean closing schools. But if this happens imminently …. it can be timed to run across half-term to minimise disruption. But a circuit break would require significant sacrifices across the country.
It would mean only essential work and travel. That everyone who can work from home should do so. Non-essential offices should be closed. Household mixing should be restricted to one household except for those who’ve formed support ‘bubbles’. And all pubs, bars and restaurants would be closed for two-to-three weeks – but compensated so that no business loses out because of the sacrifices we all need to make. It should also mean the UK parliament moves to remote working.
A circuit break would also provide an opportunity to reset and to rectify some of the mistakes the government has made. In particular to get a grip on testing and hand over track and trace to local authorities. A circuit break will have to be accompanied by extensive support for jobs, businesses and our local economies.
Because if we’re requiring businesses to close we must provide the financial support necessary to protect people and our local communities - because every job matters and every business matters.
Introducing these kind of restrictions is not something anyone wants to do. This was not inevitable. But it is now necessary if we are to: protect the NHS, fix testing, and get control of the virus.
In fact, that was only the first half of the press conference. I was wrong. (See 5.22pm.) Sir Keir Starmer is doing part two by conference call, starting in about five minutes.
Q: How much would your plan for extra financial support for areas affected cost?
Starmer says not acting would cost more, because of the ongoing damage to the economy.
And that’s it. It wasn’t much of a press conference - Starmer only took three questions, and the whole thing was over in less than 15 minutes - but it was a bold play, his most eye-catching challenge to the government over coronavirus since becoming Labour leader.
Q: If you do not approve of the PM’s approach, why don’t you vote against the regulations in the Commons tonight?
Starmer says this is a take-it-or-leave-it vote. But no one is arguing for no regulations. If the vote were lost, there would be no regulations.
Here is the final passage from Starmer’s statement.
I also want to say this directly to the prime minister. You know that the science backs this approach. You know that the restrictions you’re introducing won’t be enough. You know that a circuit-break is needed now to get this virus under control. You can’t keep delaying this and come back to the House of Commons every few weeks with another plan that won’t work.
So act now. Break the cycle. If you do you will have the votes in the House of Commons. I can assure you of that. You don’t need to balance the needs of your party against the national interest.
As the deputy chief medical officer said a few days ago, we’re at a tipping point. But if we act now – if we follow the science and break the circuit – we can get this virus under control.
If we don’t, we could sleep-walk into a long and bleak winter. That choice is now for the prime minister to make. I urge him to do so.
Starmer says UK faces 'long and bleak winter' if PM does not act now
Starmer says he wants to say something directly to the PM.
You know that your measures will not get the virus under control, Starmer says. He tells the PM that, if he orders a circuit break now, Labour will support him.
If the government does not act, “we could sleepwalk into a long and bleak winter”, he says.
Starmer says the time could be used to get a grip on track and trace.
Sage said its impact was only minimal, he says. (See 12.37pm.)
Updated
Starmer calls for two/three-week 'circuit break' lockdown for England
Sir Keir Starmer is speaking at his press conference.
He says the government does not have a credible plan.
He says Sage has explained the consequences of not acting now.
Here is the quote from Sage he is referring to.
Often the poorest members of the community are more likely to experience the negative consequences of some of these interventions. However, not taking action is also likely to adversely affect these same individuals, as the patterns of deaths in the spring wave by deprivation indices and ethnic groups clearly demonstrates.
Starmer says Sage has been clear that a circuit breaker is needed.
But the PM has ignored them. He has introduced less stringent restrictions, on 22 September (the 10pm compulsory closing time) and yesterday.
Starmer says he is calling for a two or three-week circuit break in England.
It could coincide with half term, he says, to minimise disruption.
Updated
Politico’s Alex Wickham says less than a third of the Conservative MPs who spoke in the Commons yesterday during the PM’s coronvirus statement were fully supportive.
How does No10 square this?
— Alex Wickham (@alexwickham) October 13, 2020
Of 60 Tory MPs who spoke after Johnson's Commons statement, just 17 supported the PM. 23 lockdown sceptics criticised his announcement
But 40% of voters say the measures don't go far enough, and just 15% say they go too far pic.twitter.com/psFpQhhWvY
There has been more Tory backbench unhappiness on display in the debate this afternoon. Imran Ahmad Khan, the Conservative MP for Wakefield, said he would not vote for the tiered restrictions because they would “break” his constituents. He said:
The measures before the house which seek to arrest the spread of Covid-19 will cripple Wakefield’s economy recovery and for many businesses sound their death knell.
There is no silver bullet, and without one, although difficult, we must learn to live with the virus. The continued peaks and troughs are unsustainable and offer false hope.
Andrew Murrison, the Tory MP for South West Wiltshire, said he supported the restrictions “with a heavy heart”.
Steve Baker, the former Brexit minister, said the government needed an approach closer to the one set out in the Great Barrington declaration.
Craig Mackinlay, who represents South Thanet, said he would vote against his own government on the 10pm closing time for pubs. He explained:
My real concern is of course about the 10pm curfew. Just considering this great city of London, the restaurants are closed, the pubs closed, there is no takeaway available at 10 o’clock and guess what, the first train out of London or the next Tube at 10 past 10 is going to be rocka-chocka solid, mixing and mingling with people at close proximity.
So for great clarity for any whips listening to this debate, I will be voting against the albeit superseded ... procedure SI [statutory instrument] on the 10pm curfew, that of number 9.
Updated
In an article for the Guardian, Stephen Reicher, a professor of psychology at the University of St Andrews and an adviser to the UK and Scottish governments, says Boris Johnson’s decision to ignore Sage’s call for a short, hard lockdown (a “circuit breaker”) has left the UK in “the worst of all worlds”. Here’s an extract.
We now find ourselves occupying the worst of all worlds: a limbo where the pandemic drags on and causes more damage, leaving us hopeless and praying for a vaccine. The government’s policy of continuous local lockdowns will disrupt everyday lives and damage businesses, but it won’t suppress the virus. England’s chief medical officer, Chris Whitty, conceded as much in a recent press briefing: in an extraordinary piece of political theatre, he followed the prime minister’s announcement of the three-tier system with a warning that these new measures won’t work …
In the end the problem is what it has always been. We have a government entirely without a strategy to deal with this pandemic. We have a cabinet entirely without a vision or a strength of purpose, reacting in panic to events as they arise rather than devising the means to get on top of them. And we have a prime minister who craves approval and wants to please everyone, who lacks the strength to face down his backbenchers and ends up with half-measures that help nobody. At a time when we need it most, the country has been saddled with a woeful lack of leadership.
And here’s the full article.
Updated
UK records 143 Covid deaths, highest daily figure since early June, and 17,234 more cases
The UK government has now updated its coronavirus dashboard. Here are the key figures.
- The UK has recorded 143 further deaths. That is the highest daily figure since early June, and explained by England recording 124 deaths (up from 43 yesterday). These figures include all people who die within 28 days of a positive test; the NHS England figures (see 3.15pm) only cover hospital deaths. The dashboard also says that over the last seven days there have been 573 deaths, up 200 from the figure for the previous seven days.
- The UK has recorded 17,234 more positive cases. That is the highest figures for five days and more than 3,000 more than the total for yesterday (13,972). (The government has also changed the way it presents this figure on a graph on the dashboard, cutting off the line for the period before April, with the result that it now no longer depicts two peaks. That’s justifiable because comparing the official case numbers from now with the official case numbers from March, when very little testing was taking place, presents a misleading picture of the prevalence of the virus.)
- England has almost 4,000 coronavirus patients in hospital, the figures show. Today’s total (3,905) is up 240 on the figure for yesterday, and a 40% increase on the figure for a week ago (2,783).
Updated
In Northern Ireland the Department of Health has recorded 863 more coronavirus cases and seven further deaths. The details are on its dashboard here. The equivalent figures yesterday were 877 and three.
There are 148 coronavirus patients in hospital. This chart shows how the five-day rolling average for hospital patient numbers has been soaring.
And there are also 23 coronavirus patients in intensive care in Northern Ireland. This chart shows how the five-day rolling average for Covid intensive care bed occupancy has been rising.
Welsh first minister urges Johnson to discuss 'circuit breaker' options with devolved administrations
The Welsh first minister, Mark Drakeford, has again written to Boris Jonson calling for him to stop people travelling out of Covid-19 hotspots in England without good cause.
Drakeford wrote that Wales’s efforts to combat the virus were being “undermined by travellers from high-prevalence areas in other parts of the UK travelling to Wales”.
In his letter, Drakeford said he had written to the prime minister on 28 September on the issue - but had yet to receive a reply. He said:
I would urge you to consider introducing travel restrictions through regulations in England, to prevent the virus moving from high-prevalence areas to low-prevalence communities, to support our collective response to the virus.
The voluntary guidance approach has proved ineffective and firmer action is urgently required to keep the virus under control.
The evidence against allowing travel from high-prevalence areas is clear. Examination shows the infection, as a general rule, concentrating in urban areas and then spreading to more sparsely populated areas as a result of travel.
Drakeford also called for the four nations to discuss “circuit breaker options” across the UK. He said:
We should discuss collectively what circuit breaker options might best serve to bring the virus – and the R number – under control across the UK. I would therefore request again that you urgently convene a further meeting of [Cobra] specifically to discuss circuit breaker measures.
Updated
Scottish Covid hospital patient numbers double in a week
In Scotland there have been 1,297 new coronavirus cases, with 17.2% of tested people returning a positive result. Yesterday’s figures were 961 and 17.1% respectively.
There have been seven further deaths.
And there are now 527 people in hospital with coronavirus, and 35 people in intensive care.
The number of people in intensive care is one fewer than yesterday.
But the number of people in hospital has risen by 40 from yesterday (an 8% increase) and is double the figure for this time last week (262).
Updated
Boris Johnson’s spokesman said that before rejecting much of the Sage advice in September, the prime minister and his chancellor, Rishi Sunak, sought “a wide variety of scientific opinion, alongside extensive engagement with scientific and medical advisers, and the chief economist”.
Asked why the “circuit breaker” idea was not carried out, as recommended in the Sage minutes, the spokesman said the documents also carried advice about seeking a broader perspective. He said:
They explicitly point out that policy makers will need to consider analysis of economic impact and the associated harms, alongside their epidemiological assessment, and that’s exactly what the prime minister, the chancellor and colleagues did.
Asked if this meant the PM had lost confidence in Sage, the spokesman said the committee “continues to provide the prime minister with advice”.
In his speech in the Commons debate on the new coronavirus regulations Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow health secretary, said Labour would not be voting against them. “We believe, as far as they go, [the regulations] are necessary, but I fear the government now need to go further,” he said.
He also accused Boris Johnson of not having a plan. He said:
Sage advised the government to take action in March, but the prime minister was too slow.
Now ... we see yet again he is being advised to take action and has so far refused. But it’s the same virus, the same delays, the same country and the same government making the same mistakes again.
Our constituents will ask: Is history repeating itself? Because if these tiers don’t work, then what? Tier 4? Tier 5? What’s the plan? Well, there isn’t one. We had whack-a-mole, a fairground game, but it was never a strategy.
It was just a soundbite from the circus ring showman. We’ve had exaggerated claims, complaints when challenged, a lack of transparency with the public but now further action and a clear plan is needed.
Updated
Starmer to hold press conference as Labour says new restrictions should have been tougher
Sir Keir Starmer has announced he is holding a press conference at 5pm.
Labour has been increasingly critical of the government’s handling of coronavirus in recent weeks, but this morning Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow health secretary, escalated that by saying the new coronavirus restrictions should have been tougher. (See 10.56am.)
I will be holding a press conference at 5pm today in response to the Prime Minister’s statement yesterday and the ongoing rise in coronavirus cases.
— Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) October 13, 2020
Updated
Public Health Wales has recorded 764 more coronavirus cases, and five further deaths. The details are here.
The equivalent figures a week ago were 425 and 10.
This chart from the Public Health Wales dashboard shows how new case numbers have been rising.
NHS England has announced 87 more coronavirus hospital deaths. There were 41 in the north-west, 20 in the north-east and Yorkshire, 13 in the Midlands, four in the south-east, and three each in the east of England, London and the south-west. The details are here.
A week ago the equivalent daily figure was 50.
The 87 were people who tested positive for coronavirus before dying. NHS England has also recorded another three hospital deaths where there was no positive test, but where coronavirus was mentioned on the death certificate.
Downing Street said shortly before Matt Hancock opened the debate that MPs would not get a separate vote on the compulsory 10pm closing time for pubs and other hospitality businesses, a measure which has received particular criticism from some MPs, including Conservatives.
Boris Johnson’s spokesman said the decision on the 10pm closure would be part of a wider vote on the new alert system unveiled on Monday – making any rebellion less likely.
“The 10pm closing time is a significant part of the medium alert level measures,” the spokesman said.
The spokesman also denied that the government was now setting aside scientific advice, after it emerged that the Sage advisory committee had recommended last month a series of tougher measures, including a “circuit breaker” temporary lockdown, but that ministers rejected almost all of this.
“The government receives advice from a wide range of scientific experts, and also from economists, but it’s for ministers to make decisions,” the spokesman said.
He insisted that the rules put in place in September, after the Sage advice, had been effective. He said:
If you look overall, it is clear that they are having a significant impact. The natural R rate for the coronavirus is 3, and in England, because of the measures we have in place, it is between 1.1 and 1.5. What we would urge MPs to do is continue to support the measures that we have in place.
Back in the Commons, asked to justify the 10pm compulsory closing time, Matt Hancock says there has been a reduction in late night admissions to A&E. That is a good thing it itself, as well as evidence the rule is working.
He says, even if people mix outside when they have to leave at 10pm, it is safer being outside. And he says we are seeing pictures of groups because it is easier to photograph people outside.
And he says other governments are also imposing similar policies.
If the government did not use this measure, it would have to try something else. As a matter of policy, the government has decided to put limits on hospitality to protect education, he says.
Updated
The Welsh first minister, Mark Drakeford, has once again criticised Boris Johnson for not taking action to stop people travelling from Covid hotspots in England to Wales. Drakeford said:
Allowing people from high circulation areas to low circulation areas simply carries the virus with them. We prevent that from happening in Wales. The prime minister needs to prevent it as well.
The first minister has repeatedly said that England should follow Wales by not allowing people to travel out of hotspots without good reason. He has said he will take action to stop people crossing the border from English hotspots if the UK prime minister does not.
During first minister’s questions, the Tory leader in Wales, Paul Davies, called for Drakeford to publish the evidence for a “travel ban” before he imposed one.
Drakeford told Davies that people in Pembrokeshire, west Wales, “bitterly resented” that people from high incidence places such as Liverpool could travel to their area.
The first minister said he thought recent comments from the travel writer Simon Calder encouraging people to go to Wales for a holiday were “naive” but he said it was wrong that Calder has received hate mail because of them. “I may not agree with him but he has every right to be respected,” Drakeford said.
Hancock says further restrictions may be needed - but shops, schools and universities will stay open
Hancock is now explaining the new alert levels announced yesterday.
He says:
We do not rule out further restrictions in the hospitality, leisure, entertainment or personal care sectors. But retail, schools and universities will remain open.
Mark Harper, a Conservative former chief whip, says Sage said NHS test and trace was only having a marginal impact. (See 12.37pm.) So will local contact tracing teams be given more work?
Hancock says that is already happening. You need both, he says. He says local contact tracers are best for cases where you need boots on the ground.
Updated
Hancock says if the government cannot control the virus now, then harder economic measures will prove necessary.
Hancock says it is only in the House of Commons that he hears people complaining about the capacity of the test and trace system.
He says colleagues from abroad want to know how the UK built such a large capacity so quickly.
John Redwood, a Conservative, asks what the route out of lockdown is.
Hancock says in Leicester local lockdown measures brought the disease under control. But then they were relaxed, and the numbers started to rise again.
Hancock says that he wants to challenge the argument in the Great Barrington declaration that governments should lift lockdown restrictions.
First, it says that if enough people get Covid, we will reach herd immunity. This is not true.
Many infectious diseases never reach herd immunity, like measles and malaria and Aids and flu, and with increasing evidence of reinfection, we should have no confidence that we would ever reach herd immunity to Covid, even if everyone caught it.
Herd immunity is a flawed goal without a vaccine, even if we could get to it, which we can’t.
The second central claim is that we can segregate the old and the vulnerable on our way to herd immunity. This is simply not possible.
He says it is impossible to protect the elderly in that way.
Updated
MPs debate coronavirus restrictions
MPs are now debating the coronavirus restrictions.
Matt Hancock, the health secretary, starts by saying this vote is taking place in line with the government’s promise that new national measures would be put to parliament.
He says the number of coronavirus cases has quadrupled in the last three weeks.
There are more people in hospital now with coronavirus than on 23 March, when the national lockdown was announced, he says.
And he says in the north-west and north-east of England there has been a seven-fold increase in the number of Covid patients in intensive care.
In an interview for the World at One Jeremy Hunt, the Conservative chair of the Commons health committee, suggested that the government should revert to a tougher lockdown if the measures announced yesterday don’t work within a fortnight.
Asked if Boris Johnson should have gone for the “circuit breaker” approach recommended by Sage - a short but full lockdown - Hunt replied:
I’m generally in favour of acting more decisively earlier, because I think the evidence from all around the world is that that seems to be the thing that has the biggest effect.
I do think these are very finely balanced judgments. We now know that there has been one indirect death, a death from cancer or someone not being treated in time for a heart attack or whatever, for every direct Covid death caused by effectively the shutting down of non-Covid services in the NHS. So there are some very difficult indirect effects when you go into a tight lockdown.
So if it turns out that we’re not doing what we need to do to get this under control yes we have to change tack
Hunt also said that, in situations like this, “you have to be prepared to change your mind quickly if the evidence shows that you’re not getting the infection under control”.
Asked how long the PM should wait before deciding whether or not a tougher approach was needed, Hunt said no more than two weeks.
Updated
Carolyn Fairbairn, the director general of the Confederation of British Industry said is it “entirely wrong” for Michael Gove and Cabinet Office minister Lord Agnew to try and blame business for Brexit chaos on 1 January. (See 12.42pm.) Speaking to an Institute for Government Brexit webinar, she said:
I think blame would be profoundly unfair. It has been a very confusing picture for firms in terms of knowing what to prepare for, they are having to handle the pandemic. So many businesses are focused on keeping their customers and employees safe just have a look at what factories and hospitality and retail has done. And I think blame is just not where we should be at on this.
At the same seminar the Spectator political editor, James Forsyth, said he thought Boris Johnson was “dug in” on fisheries, particularly amid worries about Scottish independence, and how compromise on the sector would deliver political capital to Nicola Sturgeon.
Fairbarn, Forsyth and Sam Lowe from the Centre for European reform all said they thought that, if there is a deal, there will be some attempt to “soften the edges” of the 1 January cliff-edge, with the UK asking for potential stays of execution on issues including legal enforcement of new rules.
CBI chief Carolyn Fairbairn's top 4 asks if a Brexit deal is put in place
— lisa o'carroll (@lisaocarroll) October 13, 2020
- 6 months waiver on rules of origin
- deal on aviation
- data adequacy deal
- legality for manufacturers - a stay of execution for those that don't know yet if their products, eg, toys will be legal
Updated
Hospitals are cancelling routine operations to make way for a rise in Covid-19 patients, PA Media reports. University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust said on today it was temporarily pausing non-critical planned surgery at Derriford hospital, although day case procedures are still going ahead. Meanwhile, Victoria Eaton, director of public health for Leeds, said hospitals in the city were “very close” to having to strip back non-Covid services, and areas may struggle for staff to fill Nightingale hospitals put on standby.
Updated
London to pass trigger point for entering tougher tier 2 restrictions within days, says mayor
Sadiq Khan, the mayor of London, has said that the capital will pass a “trigger point” to enter the higher tier 2 (high alert) coronavirus restrictions in the “next few days”. Currently it is at tier 1 (medium alert).
Speaking to Sky News, he said:
Across our city ... the average over the last seven days is about 90 per 100,000. All the indicators I have, hospital admissions, ICU occupancy, the numbers of older people with cases, the prevalence of the disease, the positivity are all going the wrong direction.
Which means, I’m afraid, it’s inevitable over the course of the next few days London will have passed a trigger point to be in the second tier.
Khan also indicated that any move from tier 1 to tier 2 would be done on a London-wide basis, not borough by borough.
We’re keen to go as one as we can see the complexities and the confusion caused by some boroughs having additional restrictions and other boroughs having less.
Many Londoners work in one borough, live in another borough, study in another borough, go to a restaurant in another borough, so we’re really keen to go as one city.
Sturgeon says Scottish government won't ignore scientific advice, warning going 'soft' a mistake
Nicola Sturgeon has suggested that the Scottish government could bring in a fourth, even tougher, tier of restrictions to the framework of alert levels that will go before Holyrood next week.
At the start of her daily briefing, Nicola Sturgeon referenced reports about the UK government’s decision to ignore warnings from its scientific advisers that the country needed a two-week “circuit breaker” lockdown, saying it should be clear that “the actions the Scottish government is taking are firmly rooted in scientific advice”.
That’s a useful context for her warning that “one of the mistakes you can make it waiting too long to act and then not acting firmly enough”. Sturgeon said “that’s what we’re trying to avoid” and that the Scottish government would try to reflect that in the tiered system it will put forward to the Scottish parliament next week.
Sturgeon says she was “very mindful” of discussions at Cobra, the UK government’s emergency committee, yesterday about the scientific advice that England’s top tier alert level is alone not sufficient to bring the R number below one. She said her government would consider adding tougher measures as part of the top tier for Scotland, or introducing a further even tougher tier.
She said:
You can go soft and try to hedge your bets, and the danger is you end up inflicting the economic harm but not having the public health impact, or you can be a bit tougher and everybody feels it much more, and we see that with the restrictions on hospitality in Scotland which are tougher than they are in even the tier 3 part of England.
Updated
One in five state secondary schools in England not fully open due to Covid, latest figures show
The Department for Education’s latest school attendance statistics show an increase in the number of state schools in England partially closed because of Covid-19.
More than one in five state secondaries reported being partially closed, meaning that classes or year groups were sent home or were isolating. Previously 82% were classed as “fully open” but last week the proportion fell to 79%.
Primary schools were also affected, with 92% reported to be fully open, compared with 93% the week before.
Overall, 91% of educational settings said they were fully open, with 8% of the remainder saying they were only partially open because of coronavirus-related reasons.
Attendance at state schools was unchanged from the previous week, with fewer than 90% of pupils attending in-person on Thursday 8 October, when the DfE survey was carried out.
Gavin Williamson, the education secretary, said:
Attendance in fully open primary schools is now consistent with what we would have expected before coronavirus. Across all state schools, only a small minority of pupils are self-isolating and schools are providing remote education, in line with what pupils would be receiving in school.
We will continue to work with schools to ensure all appropriate steps are taken to keep pupils and staff safe.
UPDATE: Geoff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders that mainly represents leaders in state secondary schools and colleges, said:
The number of fully open secondary schools has fallen for the third week in a row, reflecting the extremely difficult circumstances in which schools are continuing to operate amidst rising Covid infection rates ...
There is much that the government could and should do to relieve the sources of stress that it can control.
It is ludicrous to resume Ofsted inspections in January, as currently planned, in light of so much disruption and these should be suspended for this academic year.
School performance tables have to be ruled out given that it is impossible to compare schools fairly in these circumstances.
And the government must reimburse schools for the cost of implementing Covid safety measures which are putting tight budgets under even more strain.
Updated
Minister says pilot to be launched in England allowing relatives of care home residents to be treated as key workers
A pilot scheme will be launched “shortly” in England which will involve relatives of care home residents being treated as key workers to enable safe visits, Helen Whately, the care minister, has said.
Giving evidence to the joint science and health committee hearing on coronavirus, she said she wanted to enable visiting “but it must be safe”.
As PA Media reports, campaigners have been calling for a designated relative to be given key worker status and regularly tested to make visits safer, amid concerns for isolated residents. Asked about this Whately said a pilot scheme would be launched “shortly”.
Updated
The new coronavirus lockdown system has prompted a furious reaction among leaders in the West Midlands, after the majority of the county was placed under heightened restrictions in tier 2.
Birmingham, Sandwell, Solihull, Walsall and Wolverhampton will be in tier 2 meaning households can no longer mix indoors, including in pubs and restaurants, while Coventry and Dudley remain in tier 1.
However, in the east Midlands, Nottingham escaped the toughest lockdown measures and was placed in tier 2, despite having the highest infections in the country with 834.2 per 100,000 people.
The city council leader, David Mellen, said the lower number of people with Covid being treated in hospital and the fact most infections are among young people were the main reasons for the decision. He said he expected to be having a conversation with ministers “sooner rather than later” about whether the city will be moving into tier 3, but said “if people adhere to these new restrictions we’ve got a good chance of stemming the virus”.
Birmingham’s director of public health, Dr Justin Varney, said today that existing restrictions in the city did seem to be working, but the risk of sliding into tier 3 remained.
“Birmingham was kind of stuck halfway between tier 1 and tier 2. The reality is if we took the brakes off too quickly, we could quite easily step back and become a Liverpool,” he told BBC Radio WM. “But if we can stick with it, there’s a real chance we could move to the lower tier.”
Updated
Relatives of people in Scottish care homes are raising concerns this morning about the fine detail of relaxations to visiting guidelines announced by the health secretary, Jeane Freeman, yesterday.
First off, the new rules to allow longer visits, indoors and with hand-holding, won’t apply across the west of Scotland, where indoor visits have been on hold because of stricter general guidance. Some care home owners have already said that they won’t implement the new guidance because they are worried about rising infection rates, while members of the Care Home Relatives Scotland group said homes that had submitted risk assessments for indoor visits were waiting more than eight weeks for a reply from the local public health officials.
Alison Leitch, from the group, told the Guardian that while the new rules were “a massive step forward” there was still work to be done on local inconsistencies, especially in terms of the speed of public health sign-off for those care homes that were ready to commence indoor visits.
She also said there needed to be clarity about whether outdoor visits could continue alongside indoor ones. She said:
It’s not all about the 90-year-old living out her final days. My mum is 73 and she was out five days out of seven with family or a befriender. There’s a bit of a backlash this morning from people saying they don’t want relatives bringing Covid into care homes, but we have to be seen as carers. When I’m with my mum it frees up staff to do other things. We have to balance risk and quality of life.
Updated
A government minister has accused businesses of sleepwalking into a Brexit disaster, calling on them to “wake up” to the reality that will hit them on 1 January.
“There’s been a head-in-the-sand approach by traders, compounded by ... a quadruple whammy of two false alarms, followed by Covid, now followed by the recession,” Theodore Agnew told the Treasury select committee this morning.
His remarks led to a robust exchange, with one member of the committee accusing him of trying to blame business for the government’s failure to supply details of how to prepare while the country waits for Brexit talks to be completed. Lord Agnew said:
Government can only do so much. If businesses haven’t engaged in the process and understood the process from January 1, then that has to be their responsibility.
When challenged by Labour’s Rushanara Ali, he said businesses had to “wake up” to the reality of Brexit. He said:
I completely disagree with you that I’m trying to apportion blame, absolutely not. What I’m trying to do is to get businesses to wake up and realise that they only have 80 days left to do it.
You seem to inhabit a magical world where all these things happen automatically.
She replied: “That’s not magic, that’s asking government to deliver what it promised.”
He added that he was “worried” that the Northern Ireland trader support scheme to help businesses deal with the new checks on freight going between Great Britain and Northern Ireland would not be ready in time for January. “Timing is very, very tight,” he said.
Updated
Five more things we've learnt from the Sage papers on the government's Covid policy
The Sage papers released last night (see 9.43am for links and details) have been dominating the news all morning because they show the government’s top scientific advisers were calling for a two-week “circuit breaker” lockdown last month. But that’s not all they revealed. Here are five more things we’ve learned from their contents.
1) Sage says the government’s £12bn test and trace system for England has only had a “marginal impact” on reducing the spread of coronavirus. It says:
An effective test, trace and isolate (TTI) system is important to reduce the incidence of infections in the community. Estimates of the effectiveness of this system on R are difficult to ascertain. The relatively low levels of engagement with the system (comparing ONS incidence estimates with NHS test and trace numbers) coupled with testing delays and likely poor rates of adherence with self-isolation suggests that this system is having a marginal impact on transmission at the moment. Unless the system grows at the same rate as the epidemic, and support is given to people to enable them to adhere to self-isolation, it is likely that the impact of test, trace and isolate will further decline in the future. Addressing these issues is beyond the scope of this document.
2) Sage says restrictions could last for another nine months. At one point it says:
Government will continue to have to juggle social freedom, economic activity and transmission for many months. It is imperative, therefore, that a consistent series of measures is adopted over the next 6-9 months.
It also argues that multiple “circuit breakers” (ie, temporary full lockdowns) could be required. Discussing what might happen after one such “circuit breaker”, it says:
If regulations and behaviour then returned to pre-circuit break levels, there would be a return to exponential growth, but from a significantly lower level than would have been the case without the break. The deleterious impact would be maximised if they coincided with school holidays. Multiple circuit-breaks might be necessary to maintain low levels of incidence.
3) Sage says pub curfews are only “likely to have a marginal impact” on the spread of coronavirus. It provides this assessment in the paper on the likely impact of interventions, where it says closing pubs or bars could reduce the R number by either 0.1 or 0.2. The government has been under pressure to provide the scientific advice behind its decision to order pubs to close at 10pm. Well, this is it: “Curfews likely to have a marginal impact.”
4) Sage says although the poor would suffer disproportionately from lockdown restrictions, they would also suffer disproportionately from another coronavirus surge. It says:
Often the poorest members of the community are more likely to experience the negative consequences of some of these interventions. However, not taking action is also likely to adversely affect these same individuals, as the patterns of deaths in the spring wave by deprivation indices and ethnic groups clearly demonstrates.
5) It says new measures are needed for care homes. It says:
The rapid rise in cases means that a raft of complementary measures is required to reduce transmission in care homes, hospitals and other enclosed settings, such as prisons and hostels for the homeless.
Updated
Homecare workers struggling to get tests or PPE, MPs told
The Commons health and science committees are holding a joint “coronavirus - lessons learnt” inquiry and this morning they have been taking evidence from senior figures in the care sector. One of the witnesses was Jane Townson, the chief executive of the UK Homecare Association, the professional body for homecare providers (carers who look after people still living at home) and some of her claims were striking. Here are are some of the main points she was making.
- Townson said it was getting harder for homecare staff to get tests. She said:
In the very beginning for people with symptoms, actually finding tests wasn’t too difficult but now it has become really difficult because more and more people have been promised tests.
Once schools have gone back and universities, it is very difficult for people even with symptoms to get tests quickly.
We still haven’t made any progress on getting asymptomatic testing for the live-in care workers.
We would argue that in areas of local lockdown where transmission rates are higher, homecare workers ought to be on the routine testing list as well.
- She said homecare providers were unable to get enough PPE. She said:
At the moment … providers are unable to access the quantities that we are told they should be able to order through the portal, because there just aren’t enough supplies behind the scenes.
- She said she thought managers in care homes were leaving the profession because they were worried about being scapegoated over what happened during the first wave of coronavirus. “We are hearing about a lot of resignations of registered managers,” she said. “We really don’t want that to happen.”
Updated
Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA
From the Spectator’s James Forsyth
Fascinating that what happened in Ireland a week or so ago with the government rejecting the public health advice to move to level 5 essentially happened here at the end of September. But it all took place in private, not in public
— James Forsyth (@JGForsyth) October 13, 2020
New advice issued for 2.2m shielding group, the clinically extremely vulnerable
The Department of Health and Social Care has announced that people in England who are deemed clinically extremely vulnerable - the 2.2 million people most at risk, who were asked to shield during the lockdown - will get new advice, tailored to where they live.
This group does not include everyone over 70s. The over-70s are deemed clinically vulnerable. The clinically extremely vulnerable are different. They include, for example, people with conditions affecting the immune system, like cancer patients.
The advice is different depending on whether people live in a medium, high or very high risk area. People will receive letters telling them what to do, but the advice is also available here (pdf).
In a statement Dr Jenny Harries, the deputy chief medical officer for England, said:
Over the last few weeks, we’ve seen a sharp increase in the prevalence of the virus across the country and we know those who are clinically extremely vulnerable are looking for practical advice on how they can carry on their lives while the virus remains in our communities.
The new system will provide clarity on how best those in this group can keep themselves as safe as possible depending on the rates of transmission in their local area. Whilst advisory, I would urge all those affected to follow the guidance wherever they can and to continue to access health services for their medical conditions.
We will continue to monitor the evidence closely and fine-tune this approach to make sure everyone in this group is clear about the safest way to go about their daily lives, particularly over the coming winter months.
Here is a summary of the new advice from the DHSC.
For Local Covid Alert Level - MEDIUM: strictly observe social distancing, meet others outside where possible, limit unnecessary journeys on public transport and work from home where possible, but you can still go to work and children should still attend school. This is on top of restrictions for everyone to only meet in groups of up to six people
For Local Covid Alert Level - HIGH: reduce the number of different people met outside, avoid travel except for essential journeys, work from home where possible and reduce the number of shopping trips made or go at quieter times of the day. You can still go to work if you cannot work from home because all workplaces should be Covid secure, and children should still attend school. This is on top of restrictions for everyone to not meet other households indoors, unless part of a support bubble, and to only meet in groups of up to six people outdoors.
For Local Covid Alert Level - VERY HIGH: work from home, in general stay at home as much as possible, and avoid all but essential travel. You should also significantly reduce shopping trips, and if possible use online delivery or ask people in your household, support bubble or volunteers to collect food and medicines. People in these areas are encouraged to still go outside for exercise, and can still go to school and to work if they cannot work from home. We recognise that a small number of individuals may require additional support to follow the guidance at this alert level, and they are advised to contact their local authority if they need assistance.
Updated
The government has signed deals with four ferry companies to ensure flow of vital medicines into the UK after the end of transition period.
After Chris Grayling’s disastrous deal with a company that had no ferries, the Department for Transport has now contracted existing firms, Brittany Ferries, DFDS, P&O and Stena, in a £77.6m deal.
Disruption is expected whether there is a trade deal or not because of the new checks and customs controls between the EU and the UK.
The government said they will focus on nine routes serving eight ports in areas “less likely to experience disruption” including Felixstowe, Harwich, Hull, Newhaven, Poole, Portsmouth, Teesport and Tilbury.
Updated
UK deaths involving Covid now at 58,517, latest figures show
Today’s ONS figures (see 10.05am) show the number of coronavirus deaths in England and Wales, at 321, has now reached the highest number since the week ending 10 July and, at 3.2%, the highest proportion of deaths registered since 17 July.
The number of excess deaths - those over and above the five-year-average - stood at 390.
The most up-to-date figures for each of the four nations of the UK puts the number of deaths involving coronavirus from the start of the year at 58,443 across the UK: 50,642 in England, 2,619 in Wales, 4,276 in Scotland and 906 in Northern Ireland.
Updated
Labour says local coronavirus restrictions should be tougher
Labour says the government should have gone further yesterday with its coronavirus restrictions. Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow health secretary, made the comment this morning in an interview on the Today programme which marks a further step in the process by which the opposition is decoupling from the government over Covid strategy.
At one stage Sir Keir Starmer was 90% supportive. He has become increasingly critical in recent weeks, but generally he has either been querying the detail of restrictions (eg, by calling for a review of the 10pm compulsory closing time) or focusing on the need for better supporting measures (eg more financial support, more localised test and trace). Calling for restrictions to be tougher, as Ashworth is doing, is different. A gulf has emerged between ministers and the scientists, and Labour is picking a side.
Here are the main points from Ashworth’s interview.
- Ashworth said the government should have “gone further” in terms of imposing local restrictions. He said:
If we need to impose further restrictions to get on top of this virus, then I’m afraid we have to do that. It is why I support the decision that was taken yesterday to close pubs and bars in Merseyside.
I think actually the government should have gone further yesterday because we’ve got to reduce social mixing given where we are with the prevalence of the virus in parts of the country.
He said he would consider further pub closures - although he also stressed that he would want to improve test and trace alongside that. He said:
I would have looked at closing pubs and bars in other parts of the country and I wouldn’t say to the areas going into the now so-called tier 3 that you only get the test and trace capacity if you’re in tier 3.
I would devolve the test and trace functions now to local authorities across the country so that the public health experts on the ground can now do this contact tracing rather than the national call centres.
- He said he was “alarmed” that the government was ignoring Sage advice. He said:
I’m alarmed that these recommendations to government appear to have been rejected. Ministers, the prime minister often come on the television and radio programmes to say they are always following the science ... to justify the decisions they have made. They seem to have rejected this scientific advice.
- He said Labour would “always follow the scientific advice”. He said:
I think if I was the secretary of state then we would always follow the scientific advice. What we need to understand from ministers and I will press Matt Hancock [the health secretary] in the House of Commons later as to why the scientific advice was rejected - we need to understand the minister’s explanation.
Updated
Mark Drakeford, the Welsh first minister, has told the BBC that he will write to Boris Johnson today to offer him “one final opportunity” to restrict people from coronavirus hotspots in England from travelling into Wales. If the UK government does not act, the Welsh government will, he said: He told the BBC in an interview last night:
UK ministers were asking me today for the evidence that tells you that if people come from high areas to low areas, that spreads the virus. We’ve got that evidence, we’ll share that with the prime minister.
And I will set out in my letter the powers we have and, if he doesn’t act then, we will use them. But I want to offer him one final opportunity to do the right thing. Because that would be fair to people in Wales and people across our border.
I don’t want it to be a border issue. People in England in high incidence areas should not be going to low incidence areas in England, either.
Adam Price, the Plaid Cymru leader, said Drakeford should ignore Westminster and act immediately. He posted this on Twitter.
Begging letters to Tory Prime Ministers have never really worked for Wales. It’s time to stop waiting on Westminster and take action ourselves instead. Dim mwy o oedi ac ymbil - mae angen gweithredu ac arwain https://t.co/cIF6q6gAUO
— Adam Price (@Adamprice) October 12, 2020
Updated
Covid deaths in England and Wales quadrupled in month, latest ONS figures show
The Office for National Statistics has published its weekly report on deaths in England and Wales. Here are the key points.
- Coronavirus deaths in England and Wales have quadrupled over the last month, the latest figures show. (Or doubled over the last fortnight, to put it another way.) In the most recent week covered by the figures, ending on 2 October, there were 321 deaths registered in England and Wales where Covid-19 was mentioned on the death certificate. The ONS call that week 40. As the data tables show, the numbers have now been rising for four weeks in a row. Here are the figures:
Week 35 (to 28 August) - 101 deaths
Week 36 (to 4 September) - 78 deaths
Week 37 (to 11 September) - 99 deaths
Week 38 (to 18 September) - 139 deaths
Week 39 (to 25 September) - 215 deaths
Week 40 (to 2 October) - 321 deaths.
The week 40 total is the highest number of Covid deaths since early July.
- Covid deaths accounted for 3.2% of all deaths in England and Wales in week 40. The previous week it was 2.2%
- Deaths in England and Wales are now running at 4.1% above the five-year average.
Updated
Where to read the Sage papers showing government scientists want tougher lockdown
The Government Office for Science normally publishes a batch of Sage background papers every Friday. Over recent months its transparency record has been impressive, and we have been able to read internal government papers within weeks of their circulation, instead of having to wait years for the public inquiry.
But, unusually, the documents showing that Sage (the government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies) was calling for a full fortnight-long lockdown three weeks ago were released to journalists last night, shortly after the PM’s press conference was over. It is not clear yet whether this was because the Government Office for Science (ie, Sir Patrick Vallance, the chief scientific adviser) wanted the public to know that the scientists were being ignored, or because No 10 thought this would be a good time to “bury” embarrassing material. (If it was the latter, that hasn’t worked.)
There are three relevant documents.
First, a two-page minute (pdf) of a Sage meeting on 21 September.
Second, an eight-page document (pdf) prepared for the same meeting entitled “Summary of the effectiveness and harms of different non-pharmaceutical interventions”. This makes the argument for the interventions Sage was recommending. Here is the key extract.
A package of interventions will need to be adopted to prevent this exponential rise in cases. Single interventions are unlikely to be able to reduce incidence. If schools are to remain open, then a wide range of other measures will be required. The shortlist of non-pharmaceutical interventions that should be considered for immediate introduction include:
A circuit-breaker (short period of lockdown) to return incidence to low levels.
Advice to work from home for all those that can.
Banning all contact within the home with members of other households (except members of a support bubble)
Closure of all bars, restaurants, cafes, indoor gyms, and personal services (e.g. hairdressers)
All university and college teaching to be online unless absolutely essential.
Third, a 24-page annex (pdf) exploring in details the advantages and disadvantages of various interventions.
Updated
Minister say need for 'balanced' approach justifies PM's decision to ignore Sage's call for tougher lockdown
Good morning. Ministers used to claim that they were “following the science” in their response to the coronavirus pandemic. That claim is now in tatters following the publication last night of documents from Sage, the government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies, showing that three weeks ago they called for a fortnight-long full lockdown (a “circuit breaker”) to halt the spread of the virus. Boris Johnson rejected that advice. My colleague Ian Sample has the story here.
Of course, ministers are entitled to reject scientific advice and quite often posterity concludes that that was the right thing to do. The prime minister has to apply a wider definition of the public good (ie, including the economy) than Sage, which is primarily focused on health. There is a strong argument that Johnson erred in March by relying too much on Sage the advice. But that is based on the theory that he should have implemented lockdown measures sooner, when Sage was arguing that it would be a mistake to rush (because of possible compliance fatigue) and dallying with the herd immunity theory (since disowned). Now Johnson is open to the charge of over-ruling the scientists when they were advocating more caution. It is a dangerous position for him if it all goes wrong and the Sage warnings are vindicated.
This morning we have had the first response from a minister. Robert Jenrick, the communities secretary, was doing the morning interview round and, when it was put to him that the government was ignoring Sage, he justified it on the grounds that the PM was taking a “balanced” approach. He said:
We have to take a balanced judgment - these are not easy decisions.
But the prime minister has to balance protecting people’s lives and the NHS from the virus while also prioritising things that matter to us as a society, like education and keeping as many people in employment as possible, and also ensuring that other health risks, like mental health and illnesses, don’t get neglected as a result
That’s the difficult but balanced judgment we are taking.
Here is the agenda for the day.
9.30am: The ONS publishes its weekly death figures for England and Wales.
9.30am: Helen Whately, the care minister, and a range of other care specialists give evidence to the joint health committee and science committee ‘coronavirus - lessons learnt’ inquiry.
9.30am: The Leeds city council leader, Judith Blake, holds a press conference.
12.15pm: Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister, holds her regular coronavirus briefing.
12.30pm: A Treasury minister responds to an urgent question on economic support for areas affected by local Covid restrictions.
1pm: Downing Street holds its daily lobby briefing.
1.30pm: Mark Drakeford, the Welsh first minister, takes questions in the Senedd.
After 1.30pm: MPs begin a debate on the latest coronavirus regulations. There will be votes at 6pm.
Politics Live has been doubling up as the UK coronavirus live blog for some time and, given the way the Covid crisis eclipses everything, this will continue for the foreseeable future. But we will be covering non-Covid political stories too.
Here is our global coronavirus live blog.
I try to monitor the comments below the line (BTL) but it is impossible to read them all. If you have a direct question, do include “Andrew” in it somewhere and I’m more likely to find it. I do try to answer questions, and if they are of general interest, I will post the question and reply above the line (ATL), although I can’t promise to do this for everyone.
If you want to attract my attention quickly, it is probably better to use Twitter. I’m on @AndrewSparrow.
Updated
