Still on the four harms framework, inquiry lawyer Jamie Dawson asks John Swinney whether he agrees with some people's belief that the four harm strategy was "mostly a statement of the problem rather than a statement of the solution".

Swinney says he doesn't agree with this.

He says the four harms framework (outlined in our last post) allowed evidence to be gathered of the harms' impact on society, and to begin to consider how measures of relaxation could make a difference.

"It would provide us with a framework that enabled us to take a considered set of judgement based ... on where we would want to act first to try to reduce harm that was being felt by society," Swinney tells the inquiry.

We're hearing once again about the Scottish government's four harms strategy.

As a reminder, the four harms were defined as:

1. Direct Covid health harms
2. Broader health harms, primarily the impact on the NHS and social care services
3. Social harms to the wider society, like harms to the educational attainment
4. Economic and business harms

John Swinney says the information on harms two to four began to be assembled after 23 April 2020, and explains that the framework enabled evidence of the various harms to be collected and how to make a difference in addressing them.

Inquiry lawyer Jamie Dawson puts it to Swinney that, while the Scottish government was aware there would be knock-on effects of Covid on particular groups, such as those with disabilities or members of ethnic minority groups, no real assessment was done on this.

“That’s correct,” Swinney admits.

Taking a step back from questions about cabinet and Covid decision-making, John Swinney recalls the period following the death of his mother in March 2020 and her funeral.

"We had to completely and utterly change the arrangements for her funeral to the extent that then only seven of us attended ... because things changed in front of us," he tells the inquiry.

Swinney unreservedly accepts the "agony" these decisions caused people but says in the unfortunate circumstances, these were decisions that had to be made:

Inquiry lawyer Jamie Dawson is continuing to question John Swinney about whether decisions during the pandemic were taken by the cabinet or by a small group of ministers.

He quotes an exchange between one of the government’s clinical advisors, Prof Jason Leitch, and then-Health Secretary Humza Yousaf in which Leitch refers to an upcoming meeting, saying that then-First Minister Nicola Sturgeon had tried to “keep it small” and “actually wants none of us”.

Dawson asks whether the conversation indicates that Sturgeon “effectively expected to take the decisions herself”.

“No,” says John Swinney, “if that had been the case then I would have had an awful lot more time on my hands that I had during the course of the pandemic.”

He lists an array of ministers and says they and many others were “frequently on very long calls wrestling with these questions”.

Swinney's evidence strengthens views Sturgeon bypassed cabinetpublished at 14:59 Greenwich Mean Time 30 January

14:59 GMT 30 January

David Wallace Lockhart
Political correspondent

Who was actually making Scottish government decisions during Covid?

Jamie Dawson, the Covid inquiry’s lawyer, is asking if it was ultimately Nicola Sturgeon, John Swinney and a few select others who called the shots. Essentially bypassing cabinet.

We've been shown some cabinet minutes from December 2020 where ministers agree to “delegate to the first minister” the responsibility for “finalising proposals” to deal with the new Covid Alpha variant.

They also give Sturgeon and Swinney the responsibility for “further decisions” if the circumstances change.

Swinney argues that this is “consistent” with cabinet having a full discussion and setting the direction. He also makes the point that during the pandemic, some decisions had to be made swiftly.

But this will further strengthen the view of some that Sturgeon (and a small group of close allies) were making all the big calls, rather than the cabinet at large.

The inquiry is now showing minutes of a cabinet meeting from 10 March 2020, in which it's stated there was not yet sufficient scientific advice to support closing schools or cancelling large scale events - but to keep the situation under review.

Two days later, on 12 March, then first minister Nicola Sturgeon made the decision to go ahead with the closures, the inquiry lawyer puts to John Swinney. He asks whether this should've in fact been a decision made by cabinet.

"I don't think a decision of that nature, given the pace of events at that time, would not necessarily need to be made in the cabinet," Swinney responds.

He says the explanation given was due to the risk of pressure on the emergency services, and that "it was the right steps to take" to proceed with closures and cancellations.

We're now hearing John Swinney's version of so-called gold command meetings - which Kate Forces was asked about multiple times while giving evidence this morning.

Inquiry lawyer Jamie Dawson asks why these meetings - involving senior cabinet ministers - were not minuted, to which Swinney says a “summary note" was in fact sent out after the meetings.

“I certainly felt I saw that traffic, all those follow-up notes, for a substantial period of the pandemic," he says. "I’m not sure I saw it for the whole of the pandemic, so I would accept that there may be times when where there isn’t all of that information that’s there."

He adds: "But there should be, and I would accept that point.”

Conversation now turns to old messages between then Health Secretary Humza Yousaf (now Scottish first minister) and National Clinical Director Prof Jason Leitch.

In one, Yousaf says he took "a hell of a bullet at cabinet" and goes on to say he thinks £100m can be found within his portfolio - but he adds the "FM [is] not remotely happy". (This was discussed by former Finance Secretary Kate Forbes earlier, which you can read here.)

Leitch responds: "She was ridiculous, absolutely ridiculous."

The inquiry lawyer asks John Swinney whether he agrees that the messages demonstrate a culture of the cabinet, driven by Nicola Sturgeon's "strong-mindedness [and] where challenging her was seen as taking a bullet".

"No," Swinney responds, explaining that Sturgeon was "just a little bit surprised" the health portfolio had managed to find £100m for business support - similar to what Forbes said. Swinney reiterates that if a cabinet member could not abide by a decision, they were free to resign.

Staying on the topic of Nicola Sturgeon's old cabinet, John Swinney is asked about discussions that might have taken place between Sturgeon, Swinney, then Health Secretary Humza Yousaf and then Finance Secretary Kate Forbes outside of cabinet meetings.

Inquiry lawyer Jamie Dawson asks whether decisions were made by this group and then “merely ratified” by the cabinet.

“I wouldn’t accept that characterisation,” Swinney responds, adding:

Asked whether Sturgeon "sought to trump" cabinet ministers' views with her own if she was not in agreement, Swinney says this was not his experience and Sturgeon "encouraged an open discussion".

But he admits that the Scottish government didn't always make "perfect or ideal choices" when navigating Covid.

Back to former First Minister Nicola Sturgeon's cabinet now, Swinney is asked why Scottish ministers never voted on Covid issues.

The former deputy first minister says cabinet instead aired its views, allowing Sturgeon to get to a summary position - informed by the evidence and cabinet discussions.

"In my 16 years in the cabinet there wasn't a single vote on any single issue, because that's not how cabinet did its business," Swinney says of the process.

If a member of cabinet felt they could not go along with what had been agreed and collective responsibility had kicked in, that member would have to resign, he adds.

The inquiry lawyer recalls evidence given by John Swinney in module one of the Covid inquiry, in which he said relations between the UK and Scottish government's "were pretty poor by that point", partly due to the prospect of a no-deal Brexit.

Swinney says that things were "pretty strained" after the no-deal Brexit experience.

He adds that generally his experience with UK ministers and his Welsh and Northern Irish counterparts were productive, but says there were other areas where it was "a bit more difficult to make headway".

Swinney adds that the UK cabinet was the main "decision making" body and that Scotland's direction lay within the framework of what cabinet had set out. Tensions also increased once it became clear different decisions would have to be made for different regions of the UK, he adds.

As a reminder, we're currently in module two of Scotland's Covid inquiry.

The focus stays on John Swinney's phone use, with the former deputy first minister confirming that the mobile phone he used for work throughout the pandemic was a personal one.

He says it was more convenient for him to do so, instead of having a separate work phone.

Inquiry lawyer Jamie Dawson asks Swinney if he can understand that there may be concerns about senior ministers using personal phones for government business - and whether he thinks this is an issue the Scottish government might look at in future.

"I understand that unease. The issues for me were practical issues," he says, adding:

We're straight back into questions about messages between ministers, specifically informal messaging.

Inquiry lawyer Jamie Dawson asks John Swinney about his telephone discussions during the pandemic, and whether all of the salient features of these discussions are on the corporate record.

"I would say so yes," Swinney says.

Dawson also asks about cabinet, which Swinney says set the framework or direction of Covid policies.

The Covid inquiry - sitting today in Edinburgh - has returned from lunch and we're now hearing more from John Swinney.

If you're keen to watch Scotland's former deputy first minister give evidence, you can do so by tapping the 'play' button at the top of this page.

We'll continue to bring you live text updates, context and analysis as well.

Image source, PA Media

While those at today's hearing return from lunch, here's a reminder about who John Swinney is - the man giving evidence before the break and who we'll come back to in a few minutes.

Swinney is Scotland's longest serving elected parliamentarian, having first been voted in as an MP back in 1997 before becoming an MSP in 1999.

He was a government minister for 16 years, serving as deputy first minister for half that time. He was also party leader when the SNP was in opposition.

Viewed as a safe pair of hands, his vast experience made him a trusted ally of former First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, who once described him as the most important person in her adult life outside her husband and family.

He stood down in March 2023, weeks after Sturgeon did the same.

Is it the ministers or the WhatsApp policy at fault?published at 13:34 Greenwich Mean Time 30 January

13:34 GMT 30 January

Kirsten Campbell
BBC Scotland political correspondent

Ministerial understanding of the retention policy re WhatsApp messages varies so much it's astonishing.

John Swinney, as one of the most experienced politicians in Scotland, seems to have been informed of the need to retain relevant information on the official corporate record, and to delete the rest, when he first became a minister in 2007. Former Finance Secretary Kate Forbes wasn't even aware such a policy existed until 2022.

Former First Minister Nicola Sturgeon deleted all her messages, while current First Minister Humza Yousaf kept some of his.

All ministers are supposed to be complying with the same policy and they all knew there would be a public inquiry which would want to see material pertaining to the pandemic

So the question the inquiry is posing is: was the policy defective, or was it ministers' interpretation of it that was at fault?

At one point the inquiry asked if it cross-referenced the official record with the WhatsApp messages would it see a note of the discussion? It will be fascinating to find out if that has happened.

In the meantime, there's to be an external review of the Scottish government’s policy regarding WhatsApp messages.

The inquiry is having a lunch break now but just before that, its chair Lady Hallett intervened to ask John Swinney a question about the deletion of WhatsApp messages.

He'd said just before that there was a policy in the Scottish government whereby ministers were told they "should not hold information that's relevant to the government's official record".

Asked by Hallet if he had ever questioned the deletion policy - especially once it was clear there was going to be an inquiry - Swinney said he "didn't ask that question".

Swinney apologised to the inquiry if he'd "misunderstood the policy of the Scottish government", repeating that he hadn't done anything during the pandemic that he hadn't done in the "previous 13 years of my ministerial life".

Swinney says he believed the Covid inquiry would want to see evidence of decisions, and the information that would go into making those decisions during the pandemic.

Asked by inquiry lawyer Jamie Dawson KC whether information should be retained to allow the Scottish public to observe decision making processes, Swinney responds:

Discussing the extent of work there was to be done during the pandemic, John Swinney says he'd email his private office from his Scottish government email account dozens of times a day.

"I wouldn't be surprised if I emailed from that email account hundreds of times a day," he tells the inquiry, "to submit material to my private office on responses to submissions, on instructions that I wished to be undertaken, on any questions that I had or on any information I believed had to be added to the official record of the government."

John Swinney is asked about WhatsApp messages - a common theme in these hearings.

He says he was instructed to store and delete all relevant Scottish government messages relating to Covid and that his conversations with former FM Nicola Sturgeon are no longer available.

Inquiry lawyer Jamie Dawson then asks if the messages were "deleted manually or by some auto delete function" to which Swinney replies "the messages were deleted manually".

Asked why the messages were deleted, Swinney says he's always been advised that "I should not hold information that's relevant to the governments official record" and says throughout his career he's always taken this approach.

On messages with Humza Yousaf, now Scotland's first minister, Swinney says he had deleted all WhatsApp messages with him - but some correspondence was found on Yousaf's phone and handed to the inquiry.

Swinney says his messages "would be deleted by periodic deletion, once I was satisfied I had told my private office any material that was relevant".