4. Submission by Mr Williams, KC

Mr Williams: My Lady, I have introduced myself many times in these proceedings. I will just say I’m Lloyd Williams. I represent Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice Cymru. I’m going to try and avoid previous matters upon which I have commented and, insofar as is necessary, I adopt what’s been said before me this morning and, once again, I’ll try and avoid repeating it.

My Lady, I want to address you on the following matters: scope of issues to be covered in Module 2; Rule 9 requests; disclosure; expert witnesses; evidence proposals; procedure and Rule 10; and Every Story Matters and commemoration. You will no doubt be pleased to know that my comments in respect of all those headings are relatively short but there are matters that concern those we represent.

First of all, scope and issues. CBFFJ Cymru notes that the CTI proposes that a list of key witnesses who fall to be explored in the oral evidence of Module 2 will be circulated in April 2023. It is noted that it is intended that this is to be done taking into account the aim of ensuring broad consistency of approach with modules 2A, 2B and 2C. CBFFJ Cymru agrees that considerations to the scope and compilation of the list of issues in Module 2 requires consideration of the four modules to ensure that key issues will be adequately covered, in particular, as to the communications between Governments and in order to ensure consistent approach.

CBFFJ Cymru notes that Module 2 includes in its provisional scope the following. Central Government structures and bodies concerned with the UK response to the pandemic, and their relationship and communications with the devolved administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and also regional and local authorities.

My Lady, CBFFJ Cymru submits that it would be important that the list of issues in Module 2 includes the following matters which fall within the above paragraph of provisional scope.

Firstly, to what extent was there a sharing of knowledge between Welsh and UK Governments? In particular scientific, medical and expert knowledge? Why did the actions taken or not taken by the Welsh Government differ from those taken by the UK Government or any of the other devolved Governments? The relationship of communication between the Welsh and UK Governments before and after January 2020 in relation to pandemic planning and response, including the frequency and quality of meetings. This should include requests made by the Welsh Government to the UK Government for additional funding and the efforts made to secure the same.

CBFFJ Cymru submits that the list of issues to be examined should also include: (a) whether any senior ministers considered or attempted to use the emergency powers contained within section 1 of the Civil Contingency Act 2004 to make emergency regulations.

  1. if no consideration was given to those powers why not?

  2. whether it was necessary to use these emergency powers to protect life, or whether the Government was right to wait for the Coronavirus Act 2020 to go through Parliament via the normal route. In going through Parliament via the normal route whether any time was lost that might have been saved by using the powers already contained within the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 and, if so, in what way do they matter and the effect of that?

  3. whether the enactment of the 2020 Act impacted on the extent to which the devolved nations made their own decisions about emergency powers.

Further, my Lady, CBFFJ Cymru adopts and supports the proposal that was made at the first preliminary hearing in relation to Module 2 on behalf of the TUC that a short hearing be listed after the hearings of modules of 2A, 2B and 2C to take account of the lessons learnt from those modules in which it would be open to Core Participants from Module 2 to make submissions on Module 2 with the benefit of reflecting on the evidence from all four modules. CBFFJ Cymru agrees this is likely to assist the Chair and the Inquiry in their work.

Rule 9 requests. CBFFJ Cymru welcomes the opportunity to indicate where it considers that an individual who does not appear in annex A but whose evidence would benefit Module 2 to be heard. It proposes that, if not already served, consideration of service of a Rule 9 request on the Director General of Covid-19 Crisis Co-ordination for the Welsh Government should be served and, if necessary, should be called to give evidence.

Disclosure to Core Participants. CBFFJ Cymru is grateful for the updating information as to the progress of disclosure CPs. CBFFJ Cymru requests that when a new tranche of disclosure is uploaded onto the database that an email is sent to CPs and their legal representatives to notify them. This has been the case for Module 1. Without such notification, it is difficult to know when new documents have been received and uploaded.

Expert witnesses. CBFFJ Cymru is grateful for the information about the sharing of draft expert reports with the CPs and welcomes the opportunity to raise points of clarification or additional information of relevant matters with each expert. CBFFJ Cymru looks forward to receiving further information as to how CPs can engage in this proceedings. It requests, my Lady, that there is sufficient time for CPs to give consideration to the draft reports before the time by which questions/new matters are to be raised.

My Lady, turning now to evidence proposed procedure and Rule 10. CBFFJ Cymru notes and welcomes the CTI’s support for additional procedure referred to in paragraphs 47 and 48 of its note that CPs may be permitted to meet counsel to the Inquiry following the submission of their observations on the evidence proposal which is to be provided in respect of each witness to be called to give evidence, and so as to give the chance to better explain the rationale for the observations, an informal route to highlight the importance of the issues and why they then need to be raised with the witness.

CBFFJ Cymru suggest that in line with other public inquiries, there ought also to be a short period of time set aside after the CTI’s questions so that further follow-up questions arising from the evidence can be considered by the CPs.

Finally, my Lady, in respect of Every Story Matters and commemoration, CBFFJ Cymru is grateful to the solicitor to the Inquiry for the update as to both those matters and very much welcomes the work to be done in both areas, and the opportunity to continue working with the Inquiry team to assist in the development of Every Story Matters.

My Lady, those are my submissions.

Baroness Hallett: Thank you very much, Mr Williams, as constructive as ever. You’ve raised some interesting questions and made some interesting points and I’m sure that counsel to the Inquiry team are very much making a note of them. So thank you again.

I’m sorry about your problems earlier. Don’t blame yourself. These things happen to everybody including, on one call I did, a professor of computer science. So it can happen to everybody. Thank you very much indeed. We will break now for lunch and return at 2.00, please.

(1.00 pm)

(The luncheon adjournment)

(2.00 pm)

Baroness Hallett: Right, I think it is now an opportunity for Mr Metzer to address the Inquiry.

Mr Metzer: Thank you, my Lady.