Home News

Eleven pandemic exercises were conducted between 2015 and 2019, the government has revealed – but it is refusing to release the results on national security grounds.Health secretary Matt Hancock has been accused of “covering up secret reports” during the Covid-19 outbreak.The trials included Exercise Alice, which in 2016 tested the UK’s readiness to cope with Middle East Respiratory syndrome (Mers), another type of coronavirus.Until now, the government has admitted only to having run Operation Cygnus, also in 2016, which over three days simulated a flu pandemic.The exercises came to light after a doctor campaigned for transparency on how well the government had prepared the NHS for a pandemic.Moosa Qureshi submitted a request under Freedom of Information law asking for information about any pandemic operations.His request was rejected on grounds of national security, so he asked for an internal review.Now Public Health England (PHE) has told him the national security exemption is no longer applicable.The pandemic exercises that have been disclosed also include three on dealing with an outbreak of Ebola, three on a flu pandemic, two on coping with lassa, a viral haemorrhagic fever, and two on bird flu.PHE is refusing to release the results of the tests, saying to do so would damage national security.Dr Qureshi, a hospital consultant, said: “The health secretary told parliament that Exercise Cygnus looked at UK preparedness for a flu pandemic – not other pandemics – but the truth is that he’s covering up multiple secret reports on preparedness for other pandemics, including a coronavirus pandemic.”Pandemic preparedness is improved by transparency and public scrutiny, he said.“We’re facing a third pandemic wave and there will be future pandemics. Let’s stop playing politics and get scientific with this.”Last month former No 10 adviser Dominic Cummings  claimed that government “secrecy” in the Covid crisis “contributed greatly to the catastrophe”. The Independent has asked the Department for Health and Social Care to respond. More

The government made policing during the coronavirus pandemic “even harder” with rapidly changing and unclear laws, police leaders have said.The chair of the Police Federation, which represents rank-and-file officers across England and Wales, said they had been put in an “extraordinary” position.“For the past 15 months we have been required to police in a way that none of us ever expected to when we joined the job,” John Apter told the body’s annual conference on Wednesday.“We knew it was never going to be easy. But our job was made even harder by the ever changing rules and regulations.”Addressing Priti Patel, Mr Apter said officers had been going out on patrol “literally hours after the new regulations were introduced”.He added: “They had often received no detailed briefing because the laws had only just been passed, which meant they were often going out on patrol with no specific detail about what the change meant for policing. “There was no discussion about how to deal with the new laws or the new guidance and let’s be honest home secretary, the rules were not always crystal clear.”Mr Apter said mistakes had been made as a result of the way laws were introduced, and that police had unfairly become the focus of blame.Martin Hewitt, chair of the National Police Chiefs’ Council, told the conference that he had expressed “frustration” at the speed of changes and differences between areas of the UK.“At the beginning it was very hard,” he added. “I’ve expressed that frustration a number of times about the last-minute nature of us understanding what the regulations were going to be.”He said police leaders had created a model, meaning officers had to explain the law to people suspected of breaking Covid legislation and encourage them to follow it voluntarily, before moving to fines and arrests.Coronavirus in numbersHowever, a Crown Prosecution Service review has found that at least a third of coronavirus prosecutions have been wrongful, and legal campaigners are calling for the more than 115,000 fines so far issued in England and Wales to be checked.The home secretary said police officers should not have been “vilified” for trying to “do the right thing” in the early stages of the pandemic.Ms Patel said the government had worked with police leaders and kept them informed but admitted: “You’re never going to get it all right in one go.”“It’s never going to be perfect but the guidance we put out and the changes we brought in through legislation were not always popular but we know they helped to save lives,” she added.“We worked with policing when it came to guidance and the advice that was put out. Look at the way the public responded. We had some spiky moments but by and large the public complied, the public understood.”Rank-and-file police officers were not told of the first national lockdown before it was announced by Boris Johnson on 23 March 2020.The prime minister told the public that if they did not follow unprecedented rules, “the police will have the powers to enforce them”, but laws underpinning restrictions did not come into force for days and have since changed more than 70 times in England alone.A previous survey by the Police Federation, which represents more than 130,000 officers in England and Wales, found that only one in 10 thought that Covid-19 laws were “clear”.Police representatives had expressed concerns to the government about the “tiers” laws that changed from area to area, and “limits on capacity” for enforcing aspects such as the wearing of face coverings in supermarkets.In April 2020, reports issued by two parliamentary committees also warned that gaps between guidance issued by the government and the law were creating confusion among the police and public.Government guidance has been stricter than the law for most of the pandemic, for example saying that people must only make “essential” journeys or exercise outside once a day, when the Health Protection Regulations did not impose those limits.Kit Malthouse, the policing minister, told the Police Federation conference that the government could not “legislate for all public behaviour”.He said the government had tried to ensure police officers were “as clear as they possibly could be”. More

Labour’s Lisa Nandy has called the government’s traffic light rating system for travel “confusing” and “dangerous” and urged ministers to scrap the amber designation.On the BBC’s Andew Marr Show on Sunday morning, the shadow foreign secretary said: “I think we’ve got a real, real problem with the travel system that the government has put in place.“We’ve currently got countries on the amber list which the government is basically urging people not to go to but allowing people to go to with very lax quarantine requirements when they come back.“We think the amber list should be scrapped. We think it’s pointless. We think it’s confusing and that confusion is actually dangerous at the moment.”She added that the current list risked “unravelling all of the progress” that had been made against coronavirus to date.When asked if people returning from holidays in France should have to quarantine upon their return to the UK, Ms Nandy did not provide an explicit answer. “I think that we should have robust quarantine measures in place for people coming back into the country. That’s absolutely right.”She added that clearer messaging was needed around travel to countries where new variants were rapidly emerging. “Travelling overseas, particularly when you’ve got countries like Thailand and Vietnam on the amber list where new variants are emerging and being imported into the UK, is the wrong thing to do, and the government ought to be absolutely clear about that,” she said.The traffic light system that Ms Nandy was criticising was introduced on 17 May, with reviews on the countries on each list taking place every three weeks.There are currently 11 countries on the green list, where holidaymakers can return from without having to quarantine, however entry into many of these countries is impossible for most Britons due to local restrictions.Portugal was the only mainstream European holiday destination on the amber list, until Thursday when the government announced it was announced that it would be moved to the amber list, citing fears about rising Covid cases and a mutation of the Delta variantTalking about the decision to downgrade Portugal, transport secretary Grant Schapps said that he and his cabinet colleagues “simply don’t want to take the risk” of mutated variants evading vaccine protection ahead of the planned lifting of all coronavirus restrictions in England on 21 June.There are more than 160 destinations on the amber list, which includes most of Europe, North America and Asian countries where new variants have been found, like Thailand and Vietnam. Although travel is permitted to these countries, travellers are required to quarantine at home for 10 days following their return, and take two PCR tests to confirm their Covid-negative status.There has been confusion over leisure travel to amber list countries. During a recent prime ministers’ questions, Boris Johnson said: “It is very, very clear – you should not be going to an ‘amber list’ country except for some extreme circumstance, such as the serious illness of a family member. You should not be going to an ‘amber list’ country on holiday.”Yet travellers are allowed to travel to amber list destinations without proof of an essential reason, and some holiday companies are offering holidays to amber list countries.No new countries were added to the green list in the first review of the traffic light system, but seven were added to the red list, including Egypt and Costa Rica. Travellers returning from any of the 50 red list countries are required to quarantine for 11 nights in a hotel at a cost of £1750. According to Mr Schapps, red list countries “should not be visited except in the most extreme of circumstances”.The next update to the traffic light system is expected around 24 June. More

Dozens of infectious disease experts from around the world are urging Boris Johnson to lead countries to permanently ban fur farming to prevent future pandemic outbreaks.The scientists are calling on the prime minister to press other world leaders at the G7 summit, starting in a week’s time, to halt the trade.The UK government earlier this week put out a call for public views on banning imports and sales of real animal fur, with a view to issuing a ban.The 67 experts from 16 countries who have signed the letter, including a former UK government chief scientific adviser, say fur farms provide ideal conditions for the creation and spread of new, deadly pathogens that can jump to humans.Covid-19 has been found on 427 mink fur farms in 12 countries in Europe and North America, including 290 farms in Denmark, 23 in Greece, 69 in the Netherlands and 16 in the US, according to figures from Humane Society International (HSI).The Danish government last year culled all the country’s 17 million mink to curb a Covid-19 mutation and because the animal was considered likely to host future mutations.Together with China, Canada, the US and Russia, the country is one of the world’s biggest fur producers.

To risk jeopardising our ability to control and end global coronavirus pandemics, for the sake of fur fashion, would seem imprudentLetter from 67 scientistsThe letter was sent as global health ministers meet in Oxford before the main G7 summit, to thrash out a deal on curbing future pandemic risks.The letter to Mr Johnson, environment secretary George Eustice and health secretary Matt Hancock says: “Fur farms have the potential to act as reservoirs of Sars-CoV-2.“The intensive breeding conditions typical on fur farms – animals unnaturally crowded together, poor hygiene, stress, injuries and low genetic diversity – are ideal for the creation and spread of novel pathogens.“The trade creates potential for the many tens of millions of animals on fur farms to act as immediate, intermediate or amplifier hosts for viral pathogens.“To risk jeopardising our ability to control and end this or future global coronavirus pandemics, for the sake of fur fashion production, would seem imprudent.”It was signed by vets, virologists and epidemiologists, including Alastair MacMillan, a former government chief scientific adviser and chief vet, and Alick Simmons, a former government deputy chief vet. Scientists from the US, Italy, Germany, Canada and France also signed.The letter points out that “a significant number” of fur farm workers have caught Covid from mink, citing test data.And infection in mink can lead to mutations of the virus, which potentially risks undermining vaccines, it adds.Each year the trade worldwide kills at least 100 million animals, mostly mink and raccoon dogs, which are susceptible to catching and spreading coronaviruses.Claire Bass, executive director of HSI/UK said: “We can no longer ignore that fur farms make for a perfect petri dish for pandemics.“As the first country in the world to ban fur farming two decades ago, the UK as G7 host is in a unique position to urge world leaders to take decisive action.” More

A Tory-run council has prompted a row by planning to spend £20,000 on changing the colours of its signage, logo and even bins.Darlington borough councillors are being accused of wasting money to turn its branding Tory blue, at a time when budgets are under pressure and council tax has been hiked by 5 per cent.The authority is undergoing a transformation project in an effort to “reconnect” with residents.In 2019, Labour lost control of Darlington borough council after decades in power, and the town voted in a Tory MP for the first time since 1992.The new project involves dropping the red, green and yellow of the existing signage.“We know that the relationship under previous administrations has been damaged,” according to deputy leader Jonathan Dulston.He confirmed the council wanted to distance itself from earlier administrations, but denied the intention was to align itself with Conservative Party blue.“That would be inappropriate, and we know that. Ultimately the council – although we are in control – has to be independent from any party politics, so we wouldn’t want to go down that road in any way, shape or form,” he told The Guardian.And he said the new colour being used was not blue, but teal – a blueish-green. “It’s a colour that has widely used by the council for a number of years now,” he said.He added that local MP Peter Gibson backed the transformation, writing an article in The Northern Echo last month headlined “The world is turning blue, and we’re only just getting started”.Funding for the redesign comes from £23m awarded to Darlington, in the Tees Valley, from the government’s towns fund, which is intended to boost struggling towns.But Labour councillor Nick Wallis said many residents were unhappy with the proposals, particularly, he said, “as we’re a local authority under the cosh, in terms of austerity and council tax has just been put up by 5 per cent”.He said the way the decision had been taken, without consultation or planning, and “the sheer political opportunism” was becoming a hallmark of the new Tory administration.“This doesn’t paint, dare I say it, Darlington council in a good light,” he told The Guardian. “We don’t want to be in the headlines for these reasons. It’s a misuse of the town’s fund money, and I’m sure it won’t be the last occasion.” More

The government is set to double the number of badgers killed in England as it grants new licences to cull the native mammals in 10 areas.Since the badger cull started in 2013, in an attempt to control bovine tuberculosis (bTB), more than 140,000 badgers have been shot.And experts predict another 140,000 or even more will be killed in the next five years, after government officials gave the go-ahead to expand operations in 10 counties from Devon to Cheshire.The new five-year licences, which take effect as soon as next week, mean the culling is still only halfway through, according to the Badger Trust.The trust says the 280,000 total – due to be reached by 2026 – will represent nearly 60 per cent of England’s total estimated badger population of 485,000.Natural England, an arm of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), issued the new permissions on the same day as Defra chiefs confirmed plans, outlined earlier this year, to stop issuing new licences after next year.Defra also said existing cull licences could be cut short after two years instead of running for five, “where supported by sufficient scientific evidence”.And it gave £2.27m to a five-year trial of badger vaccination in East Sussex, and announced an increase in cattle testing for bTB.The Badger Trust accused the government of slipping out the issuing of new cull licences under cover of the other announcements.Dawn Varley, its acting chief executive, said: “We’re underwhelmed at this announcement, as in reality it does little to change the immediate future for badgers.“While the government wants the headline to be that cull licences cease from 2022, in reality those mass culling licences will run to 2026, and combined with those already in play, we estimate will lead to another 140,000 badgers still to be killed, in addition to the 140,000 we have already lost.“We’re also sceptical of the ‘investment’ in badger vaccinations, as in reality this is a five-year pilot, in one area only, that just delays more extensive roll-out.”She said until the government switches its focus to the cattle-to-cattle transmission of bTB, there was “little to celebrate”.“Once again the government attempts to use ‘good news’ to cover bad. Sadly, badgers continue to be the scapegoat for a failed approach to controlling bTB, and the senseless slaughter continues next week when the cull starts once more.”

The government wants the headline to be that cull licences cease from 2022 but in reality mass culling licences will run to 2026Dawn VarleyBadgers carry bTB, which leads to farmers having to cull infected dairy herds, although the extent to which badgers infect cattle is disputed.In the past year, at least 27,000 cattle in England were slaughtered to tackle the disease, according to the government.The cull has been controversial from the start. Opponents argue that when a badger population is disrupted by a cull, survivors move out of the area, potentially spreading the disease to previously unaffected places. Meanwhile, farmers argue dairy cattle should be protected.The National Farmers’ Union warned that to stop issuing cull licences after next year would jeopardise attempts to control bTB.George Eustice, the environment secretary, said: “The badger cull has led to a significant reduction in the disease, but no one wants to continue the cull of a protected species indefinitely.”Richard Benwell, head of the Wildlife and Countryside Link, called for a pause to culling this year, saying: “Delivering a cattle vaccine roll-out by 2025 is vital, as cow-to-cow transmission is still by far the biggest spreader of this horrible disease.“But a shift to badger vaccinating is long overdue, and yet government is planning a five-year local trial before any wider action, with thousands of badgers dying painful and prolonged deaths in the meantime. We need a much faster timeline from government on rolling out a nationwide badger vaccination plan.“Up to 300,000 badgers could be killed in total by the end of this scheme, pushing them to local extinction in some areas.”An eight-week consultation was launched in January, seeking views on proposals in response to an independent review of the 25-year bTB strategy, led by Professor Sir Charles Godfray.A vaccine for cattle would be a breakthrough in tackling bTB. Scientists at the Animal and Plant Health Agency developed a vaccine last year. More

Priti Patel’s attempt to review a long-awaited report into an unsolved murder linked to police corruption is “suspicious”, relatives have said.Daniel Morgan, a private investigator, was brutally murdered in the car park of a London pub in March 1987.Despite five police inquiries and an inquest, no-one has been brought to justice over the father-of-two’s death, and the Metropolitan Police has admitted that corruption hampered the original murder investigation.Mr Morgan’s brother Alastair, who has been campaigning for justice for three decades, said the Home Office had “no right whatsoever to ‘review’ the panel’s report”.“It makes a mockery of the panel’s independence,” he wrote on Twitter. “We’re now looking to the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel to defend their independence and fend off this unwarranted intervention from the home secretary. We’re very hopeful that they will.”A previous statement from the family called the delay a “kick in the teeth”, and said that waiting for the report’s findings had been “torture”.Raju Bhatt, a lawyer representing Mr Morgan’s family, told the Radio 4 Today programme that his relatives have “every reason” to be suspicious about the motives behind the delay, after decades of failures over the case.He said: “From the family’s perspective they have every reason to be suspicious about the motives behind this very belated and completely unwarranted intervention by the home secretary.“We have to remember that the Home Office itself was complicit in the failings to confront this police corruption all through these decades until the panel was set up.”The independent panel, which was established by Theresa May in 2013, said its findings were originally due to be published in parliament on Monday.It said it was then told that a backlog caused by Prince Philip’s death had delayed the report until 24 May.“There was no mention by the Home Office of a need to review the report,” a statement from the panel said.“However, the panel was informed on Monday that a publication date will not be agreed until the home secretary and Home Office officials and lawyers have reviewed the contents of the panel’s report.” More

Parliament’s standards watchdog is said to believe that Boris Johnson’s holiday to Mustique was worth more than double the £15,000 he declared in the Commons register.Kathryn Stone, the commissioner for standards, has also said the bill had not been met by Tory donor David Ross as the prime minister has insisted, according to the Daily Mail.The revelation will heap further pressure on Mr Johnson as he faces various investigations into whether he properly declared any donations to cover the lavish refurbishments of his official flat.Downing Street insisted the PM “transparently declared the benefit in kind” of the luxury Caribbean holiday, and noted that Mr Ross confirmed the declaration is “correct”.The parliamentary commissioner for standards confirmed this week she is still investigating whether Mr Johnson properly declared the holiday on the private island 16 months ago.In the Register of Members’ Interests, the prime minister declared the trip with fiancee Carrie Symonds as a “benefit in kind” from the Carphone Warehouse founder who has a villa on the island.But the Daily Mail reported that Ms Stone believes the break was worth more than twice the declared £15,000.Mr Johnson was said to have refused to accept the ruling and is trying to have it overturned to avoid the risk of being suspended as an MP.A Downing Street spokesperson said: “The PM transparently declared the benefit in kind in the Commons Register of Interests. The Cabinet Office was aware of the declaration and was content it was appropriate.“A spokesman for Mr Ross confirmed the PM’s declaration is correct and the accommodation was facilitated as a donation in kind.”This week, a spokesperson for Mr Ross said in a statement: “Mr Ross facilitated accommodation for Mr Johnson on Mustique valued at £15,000.“Therefore this is a benefit in kind from Mr Ross to Mr Johnson, and Mr Johnson’s declaration to the House of Commons is correct.” More