Isabel Hardman

The government was never going to come out well from Monday afternoon's cladding debate in the House of Commons, given it has taken so long to address the crisis facing tens of thousands of leaseholders trapped in dangerous and unsellable flats or holding bills for tens of thousands of pounds. Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government Robert Jenrick stayed away entirely, leaving housing minister Chris Pincher to respond at the start and junior housing minister Eddie Hughes to do the wind-up. This gave the impression that ministers do not see this as a priority, despite it developing into a huge scandal that will blight the lives of many of the people the Tories should see as their kind of voters.

How can ministers stop one of the worst legacies of the pandemic being a generation of children left behind after a year out of the classroom? This week, when Boris Johnson confirmed 8 March as the earliest schools will return, he also announced money to help pupils catch up and a long-term plan for education. There's a glimpse of the scale of the task facing the government as it develops a long-term plan in this report from the Education Endowment Foundation, which found not only a significant fall in attainment for primary age pupils as a result of the disruption to the school year, but also a 'large and concerning attainment gap between disadvantaged pupils and non-disadvantaged pupils'.

If there's one lesson you'd think Boris Johnson might have learned from his handling of the pandemic so far, it would surely be that it is too risky to set a date by which things will start returning to normal. And yet this evening the Prime Minister found himself talking about a date for schools returning, despite the timetable repeatedly slipping. Of course – as Johnson himself made clear at the Downing Street coronavirus briefing – 8 March is the earliest by which schools might start to return, rather than his deadline for anything happening. Johnson was asked whether he was once again being too optimistic by talking about this date, but said that 'opening schools is a huge priority for us all'.

Labour had an urgent question about schools reopening in the Commons this afternoon, but once again it wasn't the Opposition that really increased pressure on the government but Conservative backbenchers. They are getting increasingly agitated by the prospect of classrooms remaining empty for many weeks longer than ministers had originally suggested, and were keen to convey their concerns to schools minister Nick Gibb. Gibb had to field questions about rising mental health problems among young people who've spent the best part of a year trying to learn at home, about parents struggling to work and home-school their children, and about the criteria for reopening.

This evening's Downing Street coronavirus press briefing showed that ministers are still focused on enforcement of existing restrictions, rather than introducing even tighter curbs. Home Secretary Priti Patel announced £800 fines for people attending house parties, which will double for each repeat offence, up to a maximum of £6,400. Patel said the police would target the 'small minority that refuse to do the right thing', and warned that the police were increasingly enforcing the rules.  Speaking alongside her, NHS England regional medical director for London Dir Vin Diwakar issued a moral warning to members of the public who think it is acceptable to flout the rules.

Why has Labour chosen today to call for Gavin Williamson to resign as Education Secretary? This morning, shadow education secretary Kate Green released a statement saying 'it is time for Gavin Williamson to go', arguing that his 'record throughout this pandemic has been shambolic' and 'he has bounced from one crisis to another without learning from his mistakes or listening to the parents, pupils and hard-working education staff who have been left to deal with the fallout'. It is unlikely that he will stay in the job when Boris Johnson carries out his next reshuffle It's true that Williamson has had probably the worst pandemic out of any minister and that the rows and mistakes don't seem to be going away, either.

Labour's opposition day motion calling on the government not to drop the £20 uplift in Universal Credit has just passed in the Commons – because the government abstained on the vote. This was expected, but what was more of a surprise was that there was a vote at all: no one was there to oppose the motion, to the extent that the tellers were all Labour MPs, who had all voted for the motion (normally two tellers are from the ayes and two from the noes). So why was there a division at all? As usual, the Speaker asked for those who supported the motion to say 'aye', which they did, and then for those who opposed it to say no'. Strangely, there were shouts of 'no!' from MPs who then went on to support the motion.

Boris Johnson had a few positive things to offer this evening's coronavirus briefing. Speaking alongside chief medical officer Professor Chris Whitty and chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance, the Prime Minister announced that 3.3 million people had received their vaccines, including nearly 45 per cent of the over-80s. Whitty, meanwhile, had the sort-of good news that the government thinks the peak of infections has now passed in London, the South East and East of England. The considerably less cheery flip side of that, of course, is that we have yet to reach the peak of hospitalisations and deaths in these regions, let alone the rest of the country.

Boris Johnson has previously enjoyed Liaison Committee hearings rather too much, trying to get through the long session with select committee chairs using humour and optimism. Both were in rather short supply on Wednesday, as you might expect given the UK's current predicament in the pandemic. The Prime Minister covered a lot of ground, and not just when it came to coronavirus. On the pandemic, he warned that the 'risk is very substantial' that hospital intensive care capacity is 'overtopped'. He also said that the government did not know whether the vaccines stop transmission of the virus as well as reduce the severity for each person, or indeed whether the South African and Brazilian variants of the virus were vaccine resistant.